1900 Spandau Gew.98

[Wolfsburg]

So I picked up this 1900 Spandau a few days ago. Took a bit of a gamble on it and probably overpaid at $550 but it appears to be a legitimate bolt mismatch, Paul informed me it has a potentially interesting unit marking and frankly I've just wanted an early Gew.98 of some flavor for a while. Besides the bolt (and an unnumbered cleaning rod someone added), all other numbers match. This is an old war bond rifle and unfortunately has a plugged barrel. The bolt is missing its extractor but appears to otherwise match itself. I've not checked the firing pin but I do know it is clipped. If I'm not mistaken, the bolt appears to be Amberg. The stock itself has either been refinished, is heavily worn, or perhaps is an armorer's spare? Not sure? I can find no evidence of external serialling and almost no evidence of cyphers except for a hint of a single cypher near the heel. The stock and handguard are numbered internally and are matching. What's funny is that after some internet snooping it appears this rifle once belonged to Craig Brown and was sold at Amoskeag back in March. I may eventually look into having this rifle unplugged (is MauserBill still around?) and either get a replacement firing pin and extractor or just get another bolt altogether. It's not perfect and has some issues, but I'm glad to have it!

I apologize for the crappy pics. I took them fairly quickly but I'll try to take some better ones at a later date.

 

[Wolfsburg]

More pics:

 

[Warrior1354]

Yes I remember seeing that rifle for sale on libertytreecollectors.com

When I saw it for sale I sent the info to Paul because of the unit mark and the early made receiver. Even though the rifle was a war bond piece finding these guns is critical I believe in research. Especially the unit marks really gives us an idea where these rifles have been. Plus unit marked Gew98 rifles are more scarce to find than the kar98 carbines.

 

[Wolfsburg]

Yeah, I've bought stuff from them over the years but this is the first firearm. It was a risk but I think it turned out okay. If nothing else, it's nice to be able to document it, as you say.

 

[Loewe]

I hate speaking authoritatively on originality regarding such an early rifle, very great risk of being wrong, but generally this early I would not expect an external serial, though a cypher and normal acceptance should exist. I would like to see the bayonet lug before getting to far ahead of myself "authenticating" this as 1900 original, but I would say the odds are good that it is the original stock, which is damn rare for such an early rifle. it should have the early BL style, - open at top - but i have seen early stocks where this was period corrected with a later style BL.

Regarding the bolt, Amberg for sure, probably pre-war, but probably not too early. C/R was used up until 1915, but the bolts look is more pre-war quality to me, plus it lacks a suffix, which suggest the probability of pre-war also.

The unit marking is exceedingly desirable if authentic, which it looks that way to me (most befuddling is the OJR? R=Regiment seems error, should be battalion? Probably means something else..), and the maker-date fits for such a unit marking, but unit markings are in the same category as authenticating snipers or metal finish from pictures, - i try to avoid it as these are weak areas for me and often very subjective evaluations.

What is most unusual to me is CB never mentioned this rifle, and such a rifle i would have expected to have come up in one of our many conversations. But it is just something i know he would have loved, he loved these type rifles, colonial or expeditionary. (so do I!)

 

[Wolfsburg]

Okay, I'll try to get more and better pics of the bayonet lug when I can. I can confirm that it doesn't have the later recesses in the area of the upper band, if that's what we're referring to.

Unit markings are something I know basically nothing about. I did reach out to an individual knowledgeable in the East Asia Expedition and he has never seen an OJR marking (only OJ and OR) so he's not sure what this is. He's reached out to a contact of his to see if they have any insight. The disk does seem to be flipped (presumably making this the the second unit marking) but I've not tried very hard to see what's on the other side.

What's up with the lack of cyphers? As much "character" as the stock has, it doesn't scream "refinished" to me but maybe it was done long ago? Can markings naturally wear away so completely? Other than the faint marking I showed, I can find no evidence of any others.

 

[Loewe]

Yes, OJ and OR are the patterns encountered, OE also I believe, but almost all known are on bayonets. (basically HQ, Jäger Battalions and IR's)

I have no idea where the OJR comes in, hopefully Jeff Noll or someone that specializes in German colonial possessions in China can explain the odd pattern. It could be fake too... but looks convincing enough to me (it does look like someone pried it out, the chipping around the edges).

That some markings are faint but clear enough to see outlines suggest some sanding extensive wear or tampering, and the very few known examples do have cyphers and acceptance, - but seem to lack external serial - so I suspect these markings are gone due to neglect, indifference or idiocy.

Unit markings are something I know basically nothing about. I did reach out to an individual knowledgeable in the East Asia Expedition and he has never seen an OJR marking (only OJ and OR) so he's not sure what this is. He's reached out to a contact of his to see if they have any insight. The disk does seem to be flipped (presumably making this the the second unit marking) but I've not tried very hard to see what's on the other side.

What's up with the lack of cyphers? As much "character" as the stock has, it doesn't scream "refinished" to me but maybe it was done long ago? Can markings naturally wear away so completely? Other than the faint marking I showed, I can find no evidence of any others.

 

[Loewe]

Carter/125

Further observations:

1899 Erfurt 1.O.R.6.96
1899 Erfurt 2.O.R.5.78
1899 Erfurt O.J.98 (Jeff Noll)
1899 Erfurt O.E.27. sawback
1900 Erfurt 2.O.R.3.103
1900 Erfurt 2.O.R.3.103
1900 Erfurt 4.O.R.3.189
1900 Erfurt 4.O.R.4.118
1900 Erfurt 5.O.R.3.97 (Jeff Noll)
1900 Erfurt 6.O.R.5.62. (Jeff Noll)
1900 Erfurt O.E.2.241 sawback
1901 Erfurt 2.O.R.9.49

 

[Wolfsburg]

Ah, thanks! Are there any other areas that you'd like pics of? Hopefully Jeff Noll can chime in. I see some darkening around the disk but didn't notice any significant chipping. I'll try to look more closely.

 

[Loewe]

Perhaps just the photograph, always problematic to judge a physical property (texture, surface) based upon a photograph, but it looks like pry marks (indention) to me, - it lacks an crown inspection mark too. Typically the original surface will have a crowned/letter. This is the general guideline of when to flip a blank disc, when the disc surface lacks a crowned letter, it could be profitable to risk "flipping" the disc (assuming the rifle is early and the stock matches)

Either way the rifle, the barreled receiver, is really nice and attractive. That is not all that common on these early rifles, considering what lesser rifles are selling for I do not think you took a serious hit no matter the consensus on the unit marking.

Oh, regarding Bill, he has been absent for a couple years more or less. A real loss on many levels, - he is also the only person I have ever met in person that was identical to his on-line persona, no bull shite either, Bill wasn't putting on a show, he was a man that lacked any pretense. He is as bold and energized in real life as on-line! (he is also the only guy crazy enough to "re-militarize" a bond rifle with his preferred method...)

Ah, thanks! Are there any other areas that you'd like pics of? Hopefully Jeff Noll can chime in. I see some darkening around the disk but didn't notice any significant chipping. I'll try to look more closely.

 

[Wolfsburg]

Yeah, I may make an effort this weekend to try and check the disk!

I certainly hope MauserBill is okay! I always enjoyed his posts and the years of knowledge he clearly had. I would've never been brave enough to attempt to shoot a .22 to dislodge a barrel plug but I honestly wouldn't know a quicker, more effective alternative. Maybe if the muzzle plug can be drilled out, a steel rod could be inserted and the remaining plug could be driven back out? I dunno. Even after all that, I have no way to counterbore anything, which would likely need to be done.

 

[Wolfsburg]

Well, I was finally able to get the disk out with minimal damage to anything, but...I’m not sure what to make of it. The marking is the same on the other side! That makes no sense to me. Why would it otherwise be flipped?

One notion that does occur to me is that it could indeed be fake? Someone that didn’t know their East Asian unit markings too well marked a blank disk on one side, didn’t like it, and tried again on the other? I notice the reverse side doesn’t have the periods between the digits. Maybe this is why CB never discussed this rifle? He understood it to be faked and didn’t think it was worth talking about? Maybe I’m being paranoid but it seems very odd to me.

I also included another pic of the bayo lug area but I’m not exactly sure if it’s what was being requested.

 

[Amberg]

You are not paranoid. ;-)
I don't like the unit stamp(s) either.

According to German regulations:

the "1.O.J.R" should be stamped in the same size. The "1" looks different.
the "J" was only used to identify Jäger units. It was not used for Infantry.

btw:
I think Carter is wrong with the assumption concerning the "O.E." stamp, being from the Oberkommando ...
It more likely depicts the Ostasiatische Eisenbahn (railways) Bataillon.

PS: and I think he his also wrong with the "1.O.J." stamp for a Jäger Bataillon.
According to my sources the Ostasiatische Expeditionskorps only had a Jäger Kompanie, that was dispersed right after their arrival in China.

 

[MichaelWC]

I also saw this rifle on Liberty Tree collectors and I also thought it was from the East Asian Expeditionary Corps. A friend of mine believes the rifle is from Either 1st Prussian infantry regiment 2nd company, 55th issue weapon or maybe 1st Jaeger regiment 2nd company 55th weapon....or other. Beautiful rifle by the way.

 

[Loewe]

It certainly doesn't look good, - I think there is little doubt the unit marking is bad now. Craig probably felt so as well and as you say didn't discuss the rifle because of his doubts. Very few are more versed in German unit markings than he was and i am sure the discrepancies would have not escaped his attention.

RE- bayonet lug, early variation (attached image - witty text MauserBill circa 2003)

Ahh grasshopper...... the picture speaks volumes.Note that in the barrel channel you see wood all the way to the front of the bayonet lug.In 1903-04 when the changes to the S patrone & the L.v. sight were instituted they also changed the bayonet lug in that it thereafter had a metal 'cup' so to speak to encompass the wood it mounted on at the tip of the stock. So on post 1903 bayonet lugs on gew98's you will see no wood to the tip of the bayonet lug in the barrel channel.It was a weakness in that it( the open topped bayolug )allowed with a bayonet in place the greater possibility of breaking off of it's wood mount in stock. SO grasshopper did you now cathc the pebble ?.

The Great Billdildoe
Gunboards Premium Member

Posted - 12/14/2003 : 8:29:42 PM

Such stocks are hard to find unaltered and original to a rifle. I once bought such an early stock, loose unfortunately, unit marked to a Garde IR, - BruceK found me the missing correct BL - I will see if i can find pictures of the stock (wood) end.

Well, I was finally able to get the disk out with minimal damage to anything, but...I’m not sure what to make of it. The marking is the same on the other side! That makes no sense to me. Why would it otherwise be flipped?

One notion that does occur to me is that it could indeed be fake? Someone that didn’t know their East Asian unit markings too well marked a blank disk on one side, didn’t like it, and tried again on the other? I notice the reverse side doesn’t have the periods between the digits. Maybe this is why CB never discussed this rifle? He understood it to be faked and didn’t think it was worth talking about? Maybe I’m being paranoid but it seems very odd to me.

I also included another pic of the bayo lug area but I’m not exactly sure if it’s what was being requested.

 

[Loewe]

Took some time to find these... having a large database makes such topics difficult to find.

Fist pictures are as found, the latter are with the replaced BL

 

[Loewe]

1900 Spandau 7357 a 1.O.R.4.116

I hesitate to show this rifle, primarily because I have so little information on it, no text for context and no source recorded. However due to the nature of the canceled unit marking and the proximity of the maker/date and serial to the subject rifle it is worth including in this discussion.

I have no idea whether the unit marking was authentic, whether the stock matches the B/R or whether any of this is authentic, but it certainly looks like a Chinese service rifle (or one hidden in a sewer) and this rifle may have served as a template for Wolfburgs suspected forgery.

 

[Wolfsburg]

Thanks for the input, gents.

Ugh, well it was a gamble and it looks like I didn’t quite prevail on this one. I honestly hadn’t even made much note of the unit marking (LTC didnt even mention it) until I asked for advice on the rifle itself. Being a potentially rare unit marking would’ve certainly been icing on the cake and discovering it had come from CB’s collection made me feel better about the odds. However, it is what it is. In my naivete, I wasn’t aware faking of this sort was much of a “thing” (with your average Joe like myself likely having no idea how to decipher unit markings anyways). 3rd Reich collecting is a minefield but I guess there’s fakery anywhere you go. Just looking at the disk, I don’t think I could ever tell it was faked, but the duplicated markings on the opposite side definitely raised some flags for me. Maybe I should just find a blank disk to put in there. A shame the true history of the rifle is lost to us.

Regarding the bayo lug, I’ve learned something. I had no idea this variation existed. So using my made up nomenclature, we have “open top, slab side”, “closed top, slab side” and then finally the “indented side” varieties? In my mind’s eye, I think it was “closed top, slab side” but I don’t recall for sure. I’ll need to disassemble again to check it.

EDIT: Just saw the additional pics! Thanks! I believe the “O.R.” rifle belongs to a member here named Spartaner545.

http://www.k98kforum.com/showthread.php?16052-Gewehr-98-Spandau-1900-1-O-R

I had actually run across it on here and also on a website dedicated to East Asia Expedition study and paraphernalia. He graciously reached out to me to help figure out the “O.J.R.” marking but Ive not heard anything yet.

 

[Loewe]

The unit marking would fool me also, very few are versed enough to go off the cuff without a book and as Wolfgang noted, Carter's interpretations are hardly infallible (Craig Brown back in the 1970's-80's found cause to challenge some of Anthony Carter's assumptions, in a series of letters published in Kaiserzeit I believe, but could be some other publication...).

Authors are no different than any other specialist, most of the conclusions are clouded by prejudices and limited observations, also other people work, - this is especially true dealing with "history", where ideology plays a huge role.. today more than ever. Objectivity is almost impossible and it would almost be indispensable to inform/educate (even indoctrinate) all children with a healthy dose of suspicion when reading a "history" book or before they are introduced to any university program.

Anyway, the best way forward is to base assumptions on a wealth of observations that are reasonably agreed upon to be genuine, and in this case you are guilty of nothing because there is almost an absolute absence of known examples to base a judgement (or opinion). The only authentic examples are among bayonets and they are rare. It does make one wonder what became of all these rifles, that a relatively large number of bayonets have been observed would suggest that at least one or two rifles, or stocks, would have survived. Perhaps one is hidden away in some German collection? German collectors are a secretive lot, but assuming the research that has come out of postwar Germany is based upon actual observations, then there must be large collections somewhere in Europe.

 

[Spartaner545]

Hello Guys,

what an interesting discussion here. Sadly i cant give much new input mostly because i am not at my home and cant reach out to my literature or my 1.O.R. rifle and O.R. bayonets for more and better pictures. I am spending the holidays at my parents home and i don't travel with my books or collection

I will contact some german collectors regarding the unit markings and as soon as i have a response i will inform you guys.

My theory for why there are more bayonets surviving then rifles is that as a learning of the china expedition the german army would adopt a new bayonet. The S98 old pattern (1898-1902) was put out of service and replaced with the S98 new Pattern (1903-1914) because it was not strong enough to withstand real combat. So these bayonets were stored somewhere and not used. The rifles however were perfectly fine and after the expeditionary corps was home again the rifles continued service and are therefore much rarer then the bayonets. But again, thats just my theory.

With kind regards

Vincent aka Spartaner545