What are these proof marks?

Dwight Gruber · 07-08-2003, 10:42 AM

Tom,

An interesting and useful speculation.

The crown/letter stamp is shown in Costanzo (pp.287-290) as the first inspector's stamp on 1913 and 1914 DWM, and 1916 Erfurt. On this gun, however, it is in the wrong position for a first inspector's stamp, and the marking instructions for the P-08 require the receiver date stamped at the same time as the first inspector's mark (GÃ?Â¶rtz & Bryans, p.111)--it is not reported whether the subject pistol is chamber dated.

Costanzo also notes one example (p.302) of a 1918 Erfurt/HZa rework much as you propose, however with a different eagle and the crown/mark in a different position.

On closer examination and comparison with Costanzo I retract my speculation of the crown/mark as a rework mark, it is different in detail.

On p.236, in an interesting and confusing commentary on the Imperial right receiver proofs, Costanzo expresses his opinion of some of these marks as military "codes", rather than proofs; his description of the code markings is tantalizingly obscure, and seriously makes one wonder about the mark on this gun. He notes that he is studying these "codes", and intends to publish the results in the (now, regrettably, never to be written) Vol. II.

--Dwight

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

07-08-2003, 10:42 AM	#1
Dwight Gruber User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 3,908 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1,330 Times in 435 Posts	Tom, An interesting and useful speculation. The crown/letter stamp is shown in Costanzo (pp.287-290) as the first inspector's stamp on 1913 and 1914 DWM, and 1916 Erfurt. On this gun, however, it is in the wrong position for a first inspector's stamp, and the marking instructions for the P-08 require the receiver date stamped at the same time as the first inspector's mark (GÃ?Â¶rtz & Bryans, p.111)--it is not reported whether the subject pistol is chamber dated. Costanzo also notes one example (p.302) of a 1918 Erfurt/HZa rework much as you propose, however with a different eagle and the crown/mark in a different position. On closer examination and comparison with Costanzo I retract my speculation of the crown/mark as a rework mark, it is different in detail. On p.236, in an interesting and confusing commentary on the Imperial right receiver proofs, Costanzo expresses his opinion of some of these marks as military "codes", rather than proofs; his description of the code markings is tantalizingly obscure, and seriously makes one wonder about the mark on this gun. He notes that he is studying these "codes", and intends to publish the results in the (now, regrettably, never to be written) Vol. II. --Dwight