Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
1,760 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello,

I’m pleased to report what I find a quite interesting Luger, pretty loaded in terms of historical background. It bears markings of both German Army & Police, the 1920 property stamp & BNP/British proof stamp:

DWM 1918 - SN 2536c
(Caveats: extractor, grips and mag are mismatch)

Don: here is a 12th P.08 to be added to your HWIS database for Schutzpolizei Magdeburg : Nr. 440. (Type 3 marking)

I am uncertain about the military unit referred to. I seem to read: G.K. + (I or 1?) + 2. 88. According to Noll’s IGRM (p. 44), “G.K.” would refer to “Garde-Kürassier-Regiment”. After some research on the net, I found that such a regiment (involving cavalry soldiers with armour and firearms) was dismantled in September 1919 – good timing!

I assume this would be the reason why the military marking was lined out and the pistol redirected to a police unit after being double-dated. Could anyone help with this assumption or rectify it? Any supporting documentation would be considered a bonus.

As others, I never miss an opportunity to get better educated in this fantastic hobby.
Thank you for helping.

Bruno
 

Attachments

·
Copper Bullet Member
Joined
·
3,507 Posts
Hi Bruno,

You're right --- this pistol has a lot of history written on it.

From the photos, the earlier canceled marking appears to be S.K.I.2.88. If so, it would be a Type 2 marking of the Schupo of the district of Köslin. As noted in HWIS (pp. 157-8), the Schupo manning in this district was downsized considerably during the 1920s, possibly explaining the transfer of this pistol to the Magdeburg district. Can you confirm my reading of the marking?
 

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
1,760 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
police + police

Don,

Your observation of a double-police marking makes this pistol even more interesting to me than I expected! You’re right: there is no military unit marking on the front strap. What I thought at first was a “G” may be read as an “S”, depending on distance, light and vision angle: I now see it pretty clearly. Further to your clever observation, I’ll try to make a better picture and post it for confirmation.

Based on your info (in HWIS pp. 155-156):
1) Could we say with confidence that the transfer from Köslin to Magdeburg occurred in 1928 at the latest?
2) Considering the distance between Magdeburg and Köslin, would it be fair to speculate that pistols held by Köslin would have been transferred not only to Magdeburg, but eventually elsewhere in Pommern or other provinces?
3) In virtue of its population in the 1920s, what number of pistols could have been initially procured by Köslin to equip the three Schupo garrisons?

Taking into account your semi-negative appreciation of the three examples of Schupo markings from the district of Köslin which were reported to you, I hope this item may ultimately give you satisfaction.

I’ll be back soon.
Best regards,
Bruno
 

·
Copper Bullet Member
Joined
·
3,507 Posts
1) Could we say with confidence that the transfer from Köslin to Magdeburg occurred in 1928 at the latest?
2) Considering the distance between Magdeburg and Köslin, would it be fair to speculate that pistols held by Köslin would have been transferred not only to Magdeburg, but eventually elsewhere in Pommern or other provinces?
3) In virtue of its population in the 1920s, what number of pistols could have been initially procured by Köslin to equip the three Schupo garrisons?
1) That's a reasonable assumption. This pistol probably saw service with the Magdeburg Schupo for several years before it was stamped with a Type 3 marking in response to the 1932 order.
2) Yes, althought I have seen no report of a pistol with an original Köslin marking and a later one from another district.
3) There were 654 Schupo in the Köslin district in 1922. This was probably the highest manning during the 1920s.

I notice that your pistol has only one Imperial acceptance stamp. This probably means that it was unfinished at the end of the war and never saw military service before being issued to the police.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,544 Posts
Bruno38

Another interesting luger to be sure, two periods of German service with British capture reproofing marks,Don Maus is most likely correct that the luger never saw actual service during the closing months of WW#1 due to the absence of final acceptances.

I always took you for a mauser and other small pistol collector Bruno, are you giving that Marc B some competition over in Montreal lately.
 

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
1,760 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Marc

Jim,

In reply to your 2nd para, Mauser 1914 & 1934 are truly my favourites.
I am not a Luger collector per se, but mainly interested in police marked pistols and, at a lesser degree, military ones. At this very moment, I only own the two P.08s I have introduced in this forum recently.
As regards Marc B. (known here as "kidvett"), he and I are too good buddies to start competing for the same items, although I must say that as I am retired and he is not, I might have more time than he has to go hunting after deals and opportunities. However, I rarely do a move without consulting him: I respect Marc because of his impressive knowledge in the Luger domain in particular, and his ability to evaluate and immediately detect what is authentic and what is not with any handgun.
He is also partly responsible for my interest in collecting specific German pistols.
Thank you for asking: I am glad I had an opportunity to pay tribute to an outstanding individual.
Best regards,

Bruno
 

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
1,760 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
y'S...

Don,

I had the lined-out marking read by three persons who all provided the same answer: “It’s an S”, not a G. Besides, the last digit appears as a 9 instead of an 8. The size of the digits clearly shows they are different: the Waffe Nr. would then be “89”, not 88.

Besides, I wonder what the central “I” and the following “2” mean.

re “I”: Based on parallel info provided in your HWIS, “I” would refer to a location. Could we assume this is the district itself?

re “2”: Would it be linked to the fact there were three Schupo garrisons and this would indicate the 2nd garrison? Assuming Köslin city is “1”, could “2” be Stolp or Lauenburg?

Hope you can help once more to reduce my speculation.
Regards,

Bruno
 

Attachments

·
Copper Bullet Member
Joined
·
3,507 Posts
Bruno,

The format of Type 2 Prussian Schupo markings is discussed on pp. 57-8 of HWIS. The K. indicates the district (Köslin); the I. indicates the specific command (city) - probably the city of Köslin; the 2. indicates the Hundertschaft (company) within that command and the 89. indicates the 89th P08 in the inventory of that company.
 

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
1,760 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Don: all clear - great! Now, I can rest.
Detail: instead of P08, I assume you meant 89th "Waffe"...
Auf Wiedersehen! - Bruno
 

·
Copper Bullet Member
Joined
·
3,507 Posts
Detail: instead of P08, I assume you meant 89th "Waffe"...
Nope. I meant "P08." After analyzing a lot of data as well as several marking instructions, I'm convinced that each type/model of weapon was numbered in a separate series in all or nearly all instances (HWIS p. 63). Clear evidence of this can be found among Prussian Landjägerei pistols (separate series for P08s and Mauser M1914s) and Berlin Schupo pistols. It is possible that small-caliber pistols were numbered in a single series regardless of model in some commands.
 

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
1,760 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
interesting

Don,

Although I'm sorry for suggesting you made a mistake, I'm glad I have raised the issue.
In a parallel posting this weekend, the duplication of numbering was discussed with Ron Smith WRT to a LP08 & a P08 bearing the exact same military arsenal number: 164.R. 1.1.
I seem to understand both Army and Police had a pretty similar way of classifying their handguns. This is most interesting. Thank you.

Bruno
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top