Bearing in mind the useful input and facts that have been mentioned in this marathon discussion, I wish to present a simple experiment which will further dilute the beliefs of those critics who want to have faith in the ‘Russian theory’ instead of the logical and strong ‘Bulgarian theory’:
There is an experiment where three rather intelligent men from the US, Russia and Bulgaria are examining three Luger pistols displayed on a table in an attempt to quickly identify each pistol’s ‘nationality’, namely a M1906 AE Commercial, a M1906 Bulgarian and a ‘M1906 Russian’ Luger. Of course, the American and Bulgarian man will quickly identify the Luger sold/delivered to their home country as a result of each pistol having certain clear national and language characteristics (i.e. the coat or arms or state/national emblem on the pistol’s chamber as well as the safety marking in the correct language on each gun). However, it is very likely that the Russian man will be baffled because the ‘Russian Luger’ does not follow the same pattern/relationship as compared to the other two Lugers. Then, an observer of the experiment decides to speak out and tell the Russian man (and maybe the uncertain American) that it is a ‘Russian Luger’ – he will become even more confused because there is absolutely nothing on the exterior of the pistol which will ‘jump out’ and say to him “I’m a Russian Luger”. If it has taken collectors and historians over 60 years to reach only this far regarding the mystery of the ‘Russian Luger’, how could it be explained that a Russian man (past or present) would be unable to tell us (present collectors) that it is a ‘Russian Luger’ in less than 60 seconds?!
If this ‘identity’ puzzle would have been the actual situation, the DWM factory would have screwed up in a big way by sending a contract of mis-marked and confusing Lugers to Russia – and, moreover, an order from the Russian government would have not requested for a safety marking in the Bulgarian language. I am sorry to disappoint those critics that such a grave mistake by the DWM factory would have
NOT occurred when there was no other foreign contract with the same irregularities. Everything was marked in a certain way for a reason, and although the DWM factory (and Mauser factory) did not throw away any parts in inventory,
nobody at the DWM factory would have decided to shuffle through a pile of upper receivers and (Bulgarian) frames and make the careless suggestion “let us try and put together some new model Lugers with Bulgarian markings for the Russian government/forces who we hope will become a very important customer (like the Swiss)”.
Ironically, there are collectors who simply accept uneducated and inaccurate information like a parrot which has been written or spoken in the past regarding the notion of ‘old Russian text’ to explain the text/word on the safety marking and extractor when in fact both words are actually 100% BULGARIAN, and the Bulgarian word ‘ЗАРЯДЪ’ on the extractor happens to have the same translation/meaning in the Russian language. Based on the language and the interpretation of the historical events mentioned in my first article, there are obviously very strong ties to a Bulgarian ‘nationality’ instead of a Russian one.
So, for the ‘drowning’ collector who wishes to continue believing a ‘Russian theory’, the only ‘floating object available in the water’ is whether or not the model of the crossed rifles on the chamber are Mosin-Nagant (M-N) rifles – not much of a ‘life-saver’ for a ‘Russian theory’ (for those English critics, a Life-Saver used to be (or is) a circular multi-colour sweet/candy with a hole in the middle, and this ‘plain-flavour’ theory has – a big hole!). If the critics want to rely heavily on the accuracy of the outline of the crossed rifles on the chamber believing that they are M-N rifles, my question is why are the
fixed bayonets missing on this (organizational) emblem? And do not tell me that the roll-die maker/designer at the DWM factory had to exclude the fixed bayonets on the M-N rifles in order to preserve or enhance the rest of the details on the rifles. If the ‘Bulgarian theorists’ give the benefit of the doubt to the ‘Russian theorists’ regarding the M-N crossed rifles, a logical explanation of the crossed rifles on the chamber is to express thanks to the Russians for selling 50,000 M-N rifles to Bulgaria – in secret – who was preparing for war against the Turks. And what better way to say "thank you for the M-N rifles!" by adding M-N rifles on the Luger pistols intended for issue to both Bulgarian and Russian officers in the ‘54th His Majesty the Tsar of Bulgaria's Minsk Infantry Regiment’ which was part of the Russian 14th Infantry Division, 8th Army Corps, 1st Brigade in addition to the same pistol being issued to other officers in Bulgarian infantry regiments! Without putting much weight on the importance of the type of rifles on the chamber, I am 95% confident that it simply represents an infantry connection in the Bulgarian Army.
With reference to Ron’s post #142, point #2 (on the Jan Still Forum), he agrees (with my theory) that “it (the crossed rifles) most likely indicates an infantry unit connection”, and towards the end of his article (post #179), he states “But as for me…it’s Russian!”, then according to his way of mistaken thinking, he is saying that this Luger was delivered to an infantry unit in Russia which is incorrect because there are no records or information at all which reveals such a national Russian link, especially if the Bulgarian safety marking is not ignored.
For those critics who still do not yet understand the ‘Bulgarian theory’ which has been presented, it explains that these
contract Lugers were
delivered to Bulgaria and not Russia. Considering all the various points which have been raised in this discussion, not one single part of the ‘Russian theory’ can challenge the Bulgarian position because there was no previous contract between DWM and the Russian government, whereas there was a few thousand Luger pistols sold to the Bulgarian Army since 1903 – every thing about the ‘Russian theory’ is ‘bla-bla’ and inconsistent, and the
Russian government was never mentioned in DWM sales records as a buyer. I cannot imagine the Russian government accepting to issue any firearm to their officers with Bulgarian markings. Therefore, trying to maintain its identity as a ‘Russian Luger’ is extremely weak.
So, after weighing all past and present valid opinions and contributions, I believe that there is a majority of collectors who will likely accept the ex-Russian Luger as a
M1908 Bulgarian Infantry Officers Luger which was a
contract Luger that was sold and delivered to Bulgaria and any other ‘Russian theory’ to satisfy ones imagination (or ownership) still remains sketchy at best. If any critic can present a stronger case based on persuasive information and data instead of making queries, step-up to the firing squad.
Respectfully,
Albert
Ron, where do you want your ashes spread?
