Jan C. Still Lugerforums banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,112 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Men,

I need your help.

Shown here is a Navy holster that raises some questions.

In my opinion is it a very well done fake because the manufacturer plant "Salamander" produced shoes only.

I never saw such a double tool pouch before. All iron is without any stamping.

The manufacturer stamp shows an uncommon edge in the leather.

Every answer well be appreciated !


Fritz
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,115 Posts
If it's a fake, it's the best one I've ever seen. Jerry Burney will be able to tell you everything you want to know about your holster.
 

·
Moderator / Gold Bullet Member
Joined
·
9,894 Posts
If it's a fake, it's the best one I've ever seen. Jerry Burney will be able to tell you everything you want to know about your holster.
Harry, I appreciate your confidence but let's discuss it some...

A fascinating piece here. The maker mark...the maker mark with the edge line on the lower left. It would not be surprising to see this on such a large stamp. On smaller stamps the Germans carved away all the metal at an upward angle leaving just the WaA or such. A larger stamp would require some edging. A slight tilt would leave this line. More importantly though is the date? 1916..This would have been relatively early for a belt carried Navy. Not impossible but could have been a trial holster? Small batch or one of? NOPE! Harry was right.
I can't discount this holster as a fake out of hand. It has some very unusual characteristics that you just don't see on even well made fakes.
The metal studs. They are lathe turned. The marks are plainly evident. This is almost always seen on originals and the kind of detail overlooked by any faker.
The dye color of the leather. This has a chestnut color almost impossible to achieve with modern dyes. It was common in the WW1 era but it's certainly nothing I could come up with.
The holster is full of uncommon oddities. One would think that if a replicator or faker were wanting to fool a collector into paying handsomely for an Imperial Navy belt holster he would not bother with a tool pouch with a pin punch? A very unusual pin punch too. Looking closely at the pouch it seems to carry all of the character of what I see every day as original aged usage. This thing is old. How old?
The stitching..very unusual. HEAVY thread and holes very much unlike what is normally seen on a Navy holster. I have seen this before..unfortunately I do not have a firm recollection on if it were on an original or a fake holster.
MOST Imperial Navy holsters only have ONE line of stitching holding on the top. This has two.
This holster has no ears on the cleaning rod top. Never had any from what I can see. The cleaning rod top is overly long and thin unlike the standard tops seen on Navy holsters.
The front closure roller buckle concerns me greatly. I would love to see it in a closeup dedicated photo..Buckles were of a particular type during this era and modern buckles are too. The differences seen on them will often immediately date the buckle giving you a firm yes or no on date of manufacture. This buckle bothers me...I would like to see a close photo of where the roller meets the corners. Cancel Christmas! Buckle looks fine in another photo.
Lets take a close look at the end of the pull-up strap. An abomonation! The Germans had been using the standard end knot in leather pull-ups for perhaps a Century before 1916. WHAT? is this thing? Anyone even vaguely calling themselves a Saddler in 1916 Germany would recoil in horror at this knot. No real explanation for this.
While looking at the buckle & knot I notice the wooden stake in the heart of this Vampire, killing it. U-boat 245?
One last thing while I am in the U-boat 245 area of operations..notice the thread holding on the belt loops that porpoise to the surface. Any saddler worth his salt would hammer down these threads. This procedure is outlined in any leather manual of the period. Thread sticking up like this would quickly be worn away and be useless for it's intended porpoise. HAHA! My little joke.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,112 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thank you very much, Jerry.

This holster is not in my possession but a very good friend of mine will be happy on your statement. It saves a lot of money !!


Best regards from Germany

Fritz
 

·
Moderator / Gold Bullet Member
Joined
·
9,894 Posts
Thank you very much, Jerry.

This holster is not in my possession but a very good friend of mine will be happy on your statement. It saves a lot of money !!


Best regards from Germany

Fritz
Fritz, An interesting specimen for dissection! Harry calling it ...then Jeff holding up the cross to this blood sucker! Thanks for showing it..keeps us all in practice!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,632 Posts
Taschen dieser Art wurden erst ab ENDE 1917 (!) für die ERSATZMANNSCHAFTEN der Marine Infanterie in Flandern und Kurland gefertigt und welchen Zusammenhang sollte es schon zwischen Infanterie und U- Boot geben. Schon aus Militär- geschichtlicher Sicht macht das keinen Sinn. Marineeinheiten stempelten Waffen nur bis zum Beginn des 1. Weltkriegs fiskalisch. Marinetaschen hatten auch nie eine Vorrichtung für einen Durchschlag und ein Durchschlag sah auch anders aus.
 

·
Moderator - Diamond Bullet Member
Joined
·
2,625 Posts
Taschen dieser Art wurden erst ab ENDE 1917 (!) für die ERSATZMANNSCHAFTEN der Marine Infanterie in Flandern und Kurland gefertigt und welchen Zusammenhang sollte es schon zwischen Infanterie und U- Boot geben. Schon aus Militär- geschichtlicher Sicht macht das keinen Sinn. Marineeinheiten stempelten Waffen nur bis zum Beginn des 1. Weltkriegs fiskalisch. Marinetaschen hatten auch nie eine Vorrichtung für einen Durchschlag und ein Durchschlag sah auch anders aus.
Klaus said:

Holsters of this type were only made from the END of 1917 (!) for the replacement troops of the marine infantry in Flanders and Courland [western Latvia] What connection would there be between infantry and the submarine? This makes no sense from a military history point of view. Naval units stamped weapons only until the beginning of World War I. Also, Navy holsters never had provision for a pin punch, and a pin punch looked different.
 

·
Moderator - Diamond Bullet Member
Joined
·
2,625 Posts
Thanks for the translation!
Kein Problem. Das ist genauso warum lerne ich Deutsch. Um Bücher oder andere Texte über die Kaiserliche Marine zu übersetzen. :)
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top