Gerben,
You make an interesting point, and I am mildly embarrassed that I did not think to take that further research step.
The directive as you quote it is ambiguous. The 10,000 pistol series is clear enough; however, the instruction that "The second series starting with 10000a..." is not. As we have come to understand the numbering series, the serial number previous to that number would be 9999(ns), and 10000a would actually be 1a. Unless...and this is a new thought...the numbering instruction was to be taken literally, and the 10000letter was actually intended to be the first in the next letter series, sort of a sn 0. In the example of the S/42 you present, the series would be:
...9999f, 10000g, 1g...etc.
G�¶rtz & Bryans are not much help in understanding this. Their translation of the Notes specifying letter suffixes, reads: "2.) To identify the sequence of any 10,000 pistols, small Latin letters (cursive handwriting type) will be struck with 2mm high punches, the second 10,000 being distinguisned with 'a' and the process continuing to the end of the year..."
As I considered this, I was moved to check Luger production, as reported in Central Powers Pistols and Third Reich Lugers.
DWM military production would have had a total of 76 10000letter serial numbers (8 of them would have been 10000(ns) ) (This is in the 1-10000 conventional understanding model).
Erfurt military production would have had a total of 49 10000letter serial numbers (6 of them 10000(ns) ).
Mauser military production would have had a total of 79 10000letter serial lnumbers (4 of them would be 10000(ns) ).
This would make a total of 204 military Lugers with 10000letter serial numbers, 18 of them without an actuall suffix. Considering the survival rate of these guns the reported rarity of the examples is not surprising, and makes it impossible to differentiate between their being numbering mistakes or actual numbering practice.
--Dwight
|