Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner
1 - 1 of 1 Posts

· Registered
33 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Can Jan Still, Per Mathisen, CBrown, or anybody else provide me some information on the following?

I recently obtained a holster which, although unmarked, is obviously for the Norwegian M1914 pistol. Sorry I can't send pics, since I have no digital camera, scanner, etc. However, the front of the holster is exactly as shown (1) on page 150 of Bender's book on Military Holsters of WWII; (2) on the thread captioned "Norwegian M1914 (P657n)" that began with Jan Still's posting of 11/16/03 (hereinafter "Jan Still's thread"); and (3) on the thread captioned "Norwegian M1914 WaA84" that began with Pancho's posting of 12/24/03 (hereinafter "Pancho's thread"). It also has the lift-up strap inside, no outside magazine pocket, and color appears to be the same light reddish-brown as the one shown on Jan Still's thread.

The difference is on the BACK, for instead of the two thin belt loops that extend a short distance above the top of the flap on the "conventional" version mentioned above, it has only a SINGLE, WIDER belt loop that is 2-1/4" wide by 4" high, with the top of the loop located 1-1/2" to 1-3/4" BELOW the top of the flap. The belt loop is sewn on a slight bias, not nearly as severe as on the later M1914 holster with outside magazine pocket as shown on page 151 of Bender's book but sufficient to give a slight butt-forward cant to the holster if worn on the left side. The single belt loop is almost certainly not a post-manufacture modification, since (1) its color and texture perfectly match the leather of the holster, and (2) even more important, there are no signs whatsover that two thin belt loop-straps, earmarks of the "conventional" design, have ever been there and were removed.

The features of this holster don't seem to specifically fit any description provided in CBrown's 9/22/03 posting or Per Mathisen's response of same date, both on "Pancho's thread." So what do I have? Has anybody ever seen or heard of a Norwegian M1914 holster with the same frontal appearance as the "conventional" (presumably Norwegian pre-occupation) design with no outside magazine pocket but with the single belt loop on reverse that I described? I don't have Whittington's Vol. III. Is one shown there? Is it logical to speculate that this might have been a "transitional" development - a modified version of the original design that may have been made by/for the Germans, perhaps during early occupation (1941,1942) production of the 1914, before they moved to the evidently late-war
design (with outside pocket) shown on Bender's page 151? Certainly its belt-loop placement is more like that of most other German holsters and would be more conducive to the left side, butt forward, cross draw carry that seems to have been the practice with most WWII Germans, especially officers. Furthermore, I can find no evidence anywhere that the pre-war Norwegian military might have used anything other than the original design. Can anyone supply any information that might tend to prove, substantiate, support, question, refute, disprove, even ridicule, this theory?

This is not just a matter of passing, casual curiosity for me, since shortly before obtaining this holster I acquired a super-nice 1941-dated Norwegian M1914, and the list provided by Per Mathisen in Jan Still's thread indicates that this S/N was one of the lot of 100 pistols delivered to the AOK Norwegen on Sept. 8, 1941. (The pistol is at least 98%, maybe 99%, with only a couple of small, even tiny, marks or dings plus the loss of about 20% of the black enamel on the magazine base that keep it from being absolutely stone-cold mint! It really appears unissued; there is no high-edge wear, not even in the usual places - doesn't look like it was ever in a holster. Can't wait until I can get a digital camera and show you guys some pics.) So if the single belt-loop might indicate that this is a holster made fairly early in the German occupation, it would be a perfect mate for my 1941. (Yeah, I know this might be wishful thinking, but it does seem logical - for the reasons set forth above.) Comments anyone??
1 - 1 of 1 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.