The M1906 Russian Contract Controversy Strikes Again

[Imperial Arms]

Originally Posted by Norme

So here we sit, we haven't found any thing new in a year or so and the best have been at it pretty hard ( Albert, Ed, Ron)

Hi Vern, Thats not quite true. Since this issue was last thrashed out , the new Görtz/Sturgess book has been published. Dr Sturgess throws his not inconsiderable weight on the side of the Russian commercial theory. I know that this will not impress Albert, but I think it does tilt the scales. Best regards, Norm

Norm, what has not been performed by the critics is deep 'detective' work on this topic. The critics only 'ammo' is a defensive position only stating that the 'Bulgarian theory' is conjecture. It seems that the 'Russian theory' only gives the critics some form of comfort with regards to errors made in the past. If Kenyon agrees with me that the 'Bulgarian theory' has more truth/substance than compared to the old shaky 'Russian theory', what is the problem with the critics believing a much stronger theory? Here is a promenant author accepting a mistake which the critics cannot otherwise handle. It basically means that the critics wish to continue believing in wrong information twisted by other 'experts' when they do not want to look deeper into the culture and heritage of Germany during the imperial era. I agree that 'business is business', but I do think that the Germans would compromise their reputation by selling a foreign government/military a small quantity of surplus firearms during the Imperial era. Such a situation would have placed a large stain on the DWM factory. Whatever a foreign military did with their pistols after delivery is their business.

Albert