1900 Spandau Gew.98

[Spartaner545]

Hello Guys,

as promised i asked some german collectors about this stamp. While this unit marking is not stamped recording to the regulations it seems to be a variant that the east asian infantry regiments used. So this marking is not a fake but rather a curiosity.

A big thank to the user "Ulfberth" from the deutsche-blankwaffenforum for the solution and the other pictures. You can see his many articles about german edged weapons on his website http://www.seitengewehr.de.


As a comparison i will add some pictures of the very rare east asian infantry officer sword from his collection. It features the same markings as the shown rifle.


With kind regards

Vincent

PS: I would have never thought that this was a legitimate unit marking... not the right hight and not marked according to regulations but we all never stop learning.

 

[Loewe]

It is good to see something in support of Jeff's argument, an argument that isn't based upon "human error" as much as proper for this expedition, finding a supporting item is always better than an opinion alone. Still would like to see more items though, to get that "preponderance of supporting evidence" thing working!

I looked through some old kaiserzeits (newsletters), some articles cover the EA expedition, but nothing related to unit markings. I do not have them all though..

Hello Guys,

as promised i asked some german collectors about this stamp. While this unit marking is not stamped recording to the regulations it seems to be a variant that the east asian infantry regiments used. So this marking is not a fake but rather a curiosity.

A big thank to the user "Ulfberth" from the deutsche-blankwaffenforum for the solution and the other pictures. You can see his many articles about german edged weapons on his website http://www.seitengewehr.de.


As a comparison i will add some pictures of the very rare east asian infantry officer sword from his collection. It features the same markings as the shown rifle.


With kind regards

Vincent

PS: I would have never thought that this was a legitimate unit marking... not the right hight and not marked according to regulations but we all never stop learning.

 

[Wolfsburg]

Hello Guys,

as promised i asked some german collectors about this stamp. While this unit marking is not stamped recording to the regulations it seems to be a variant that the east asian infantry regiments used. So this marking is not a fake but rather a curiosity.

A big thank to the user "Ulfberth" from the deutsche-blankwaffenforum for the solution and the other pictures. You can see his many articles about german edged weapons on his website http://www.seitengewehr.de.


As a comparison i will add some pictures of the very rare east asian infantry officer sword from his collection. It features the same markings as the shown rifle.


With kind regards

Vincent

PS: I would have never thought that this was a legitimate unit marking... not the right hight and not marked according to regulations but we all never stop learning.

Vincent, I can’t thank you enough for taking the time to research this! My efforts had been unsuccessful beyond conjecture! It certainly feels a little more reassuring knowing there is at least one other OJR marked item out there. Hopefully more will surface in time but with the scarcity of East Asian Korp items, it seems a safe bet that they will be few and far between.

 

[Amberg]

..... Here are some prewar lugers that do not comply:

* 1st issue 1908, s/n 1716; Regimental: J.R.150.R. (R lined-out) M.G.36.
* 1st issue 1908, s/n 9573a; Regimental: J.R.124
* DWM 1910, s/n 5145b; Regimental: J.R.72.10.5.
* DWM 1910, s/n 8184c; Regimental: J.R.141.MG.19.
* DWM 1912, s/n 7407; Regimental: Bay.21.J.R.12K.34.

There is no way to document when they were actually marked but they are not Reserve Regiments.

Hello,
the P.08 is a different story. They were unit marked throughout the war. I guess, only because they easily got lost. ;-)
Wartime unit stamps on P.08 that do not comply to regulations are not uncommon.
I was talking about rifles and bayonets (1900 - 1914) and should have mentioned this. Sorry.

The marking on the DWM 1912, s/n 7407; Regimental: Bay.21.J.R.12K.34. is most interesting! Do you have any further information about that pistol? I almost dare to bet that it is "1920" property marked.
It most likely is a Reichswehr unit stamp from the period between May 29th 1922 and November 1st 1922.

Another reason why I do not like the markings on disk of the rifle and the infantry officer sword (btw: it is not a sword, but rather a rapier) is that the dies were provided by the Gewehrfabrik Danzig (GwF Amberg for Bavaria). It does not make any sense to me, why there should be different dies sets. .... and the rapier is stamped in the wrong spot (as per regulations).
Thanks
Wolfgang

 

[Spartaner545]

Another reason why I do not like the markings on disk of the rifle and the infantry officer sword (btw: it is not a sword, but rather a rapier) is that the dies were provided by the Gewehrfabrik Danzig (GwF Amberg for Bavaria). It does not make any sense to me, why there should be different dies sets. .... and the rapier is stamped in the wrong spot (as per regulations).
Thanks
Wolfgang

I am 100% with Amberg here. Every reason why i never would have thought that the O.J.R. markings are legit is already mentioned by Amberg and i don't have to repeat them. But in this case i asked one of the most renown collectors of imperial german edged weapons in Germany and i trust his answer. Maybe the unit markings were stamped during the campaign in China or later by the two regiments who stayed until 1906 as the Ostasiatische Besatzungs-Brigarde and are therefore not stamped according to regulations. Just a guess.

That is the whole "problem" that you usually face with the wartime (late 1914 until 1918) markings. It is way harder or even impossible to make sure if these markings were stamped by a Büchsenmacher at the front who didn't care about the order to stop marking the weapons during the war or if they are just a fake to make a typical mass-produced wartime weapon sell at a higher price. I have seen so many fake unit markings here in Germany (and bought some myself in my early collector career ) that i personally would never buy a weapon with a non-regulation unit marking again. It is so much harder to fake unit stamps within the regulations...

I heard that you guys in the US have a saying that goes something like this: "never buy the story, always by the gun itself" and i really like this american saying. In my own humble opinion this should count for non-regulation unit markings as well.


Thats just my personal opinion and i hope i didn't stepped on someones foot.


With kind regards

Vincent



By the way, the "I" in infantry unit markings was officially replaced with the "J" on may 6th 1923 during the Reichswehr period. This was done to help differentiate between the I and the roman number 1 (I).

 

[Loewe]

I agree that it is fool hardy to place too much value in this unit marking, especially at this point, - I still think there is considerable doubt about the authenticity. Certainly enough to be wary of falling into another American catchphrase, - "There's a sucker born every minute..."

There are plenty of confidence men working this field in America, though typically of low quality work. In Germany and Austria the quality varies widely, I see some impressive work, even tinkering with maker-dates on receivers, some quite passable, though I think the problem is worse in Austria and Poland, where you see a lot of con men propping up their work with elaborate stories, especially in regards to Steyr-Daimler-Puch, - somehow conflating being "Austrian" gives special insight to the subject or products they made.

Anyway, I am intrigued by the possibilities Jeff and Vincent introduced, but there is still plenty of suspicion remaining. Personally I still lean on the unit marking being bad, but I am always suspicious of "new" things and the merit of getting too far ahead of research, - far more preferring the well worn path in such matters. A path that may not produce "discoveries" and new or radical ideas, but far less likely to offer unpleasant surprises.

Research must reside on the side of caution until such time evidence or observations provide a firmer ground. Otherwise you undermine the credibility of all you have produced.

It is way harder or even impossible to make sure if these markings were stamped by a Büchsenmacher at the front who didn't care about the order to stop marking the weapons during the war or if they are just a fake to make a typical mass-produced wartime weapon sell at a higher price. I have seen so many fake unit markings here in Germany (and bought some myself in my early collector career ) that i personally would never buy a weapon with a non-regulation unit marking again. It is so much harder to fake unit stamps within the regulations...

I heard that you guys in the US have a saying that goes something like this: "never buy the story, always by the gun itself" and i really like this american saying. In my own humble opinion this should count for non-regulation unit markings as well.

 

[Wolfsburg]

As it is, I think there’s always going to be some level of healthy skepticism in regards to this unit marking. We’ve had some pretty knowledgeable guys that say it is real (and apparently is a known variation according to the gentleman Vincent discussed it with), but the fact the fact it doesn’t fit within expected guidelines and regulations likely means there will always be some question regarding its legitimacy. My hope is more examples will come to light in time, but as I said, I think they will be few and far between if at all. The limited scope of the expedition, the time that has passed, and the fact this disk marking is an oddball (if real) certainly limits the odds. Even then, there’s the possibility of multiple fakes being made. I find this to be a fascinating avenue to explore as I initially just liked the rifle because it is so early and turned out to be all matching but the bolt. The neat and rare unit marking would be a nice bonus though!

 

[Amberg]

...... as I initially just liked the rifle because it is so early and turned out to be all matching but the bolt. The neat and rare unit marking would be a nice bonus though!

Hope you enjoy the rifle as it is. It is a very nice early Gewehr 98!

 

[Wolfsburg]

Thanks! I’m contemplating having it “reactivated” back to firing condition. Not sure whether to replace the bolt altogether or just buy a new extractor and firing pin. I do wish it still had an early bolt body with small vent holes but I imagine theyre next to impossible to find. Getting the barrel unplugged (and likely counterbored) is also another matter entirely!

 

[feldmütze]

OK, our fellow collectors on the other side of the pond, you're now seeing humped regimental markings on Gew98's over there?

 

[Amberg]

Yes, they show up from time to time.
More common are fake markings on bayonets and sniper scopes.

 

[Fal Grunt]

I found this a very interesting conversation to follow. Not EXACTLY the same, but wanted to include this picture of an example I have. I know it is not fake, and while I only know a PORTION of its history I can be reasonably certain it is genuine.

I offer it primarily in reference to the size/location of the 1.

 

[Wolfsburg]

Very interesting! Thanks for posting this! This whole thing has certainly been a crash course in regimental markings for sure!