P08 DWM 1913 named

Doubs · 12-17-2002, 03:36 PM

John, a couple of possibilities come to mind as to how a military Luger could bear the name of the good Lt.

Let me say up front that everything here is CONJECTURE... except that the date on the Luger designates a military issue pistol. On that I think we can agree.

While George Anderson states that all German officers were required to purchase their own equipment, there may have been options available depending upon regular service, reserve service and/or what state the soldier's unit was from. What were the regulations prior to WW1? George, can you expand the information you've given so far? (I don't know the answers and I'm hoping someone else does.)

Another thought is that officers may have been required to provide their own uniforms, boots etc., but did that extend to sidearms? It seems to me that the vast majority of Lugers captured from German officers in WW1 were military issue - had a date on the receiver - so it raises the question of how an officer could, or was required to, purchase government property and retain it as his own personal property?

Was the policy regarding sidearm issue to officers the same before, during and after WW1? Policies do have a habit of changing and what was true in WW2 may not apply to Lt. Bohn's era.

The other ideas include the purchase of the pistol from another officer or NCO who owned the pistol. Also, a presentation piece from the Lt.'s unit, comrades, men etc.

I tend to agree that the German Army is unlikely to have allowed a military issue pistol to be inscribed in the manner of the pistol in question, there's little doubt that the Luger WAS military issue at one time and that something unusual has happened here.

The inscription is unusual and it's a Luger I'd like to own.... whatever the explaination for it's existence.

12-17-2002, 03:36 PM	#19
Doubs User Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Byron, Georgia Posts: 1,736 Thanks: 819 Thanked 1,768 Times in 585 Posts	John, a couple of possibilities come to mind as to how a military Luger could bear the name of the good Lt. Let me say up front that everything here is CONJECTURE... except that the date on the Luger designates a military issue pistol. On that I think we can agree. While George Anderson states that all German officers were required to purchase their own equipment, there may have been options available depending upon regular service, reserve service and/or what state the soldier's unit was from. What were the regulations prior to WW1? George, can you expand the information you've given so far? (I don't know the answers and I'm hoping someone else does.) Another thought is that officers may have been required to provide their own uniforms, boots etc., but did that extend to sidearms? It seems to me that the vast majority of Lugers captured from German officers in WW1 were military issue - had a date on the receiver - so it raises the question of how an officer could, or was required to, purchase government property and retain it as his own personal property? Was the policy regarding sidearm issue to officers the same before, during and after WW1? Policies do have a habit of changing and what was true in WW2 may not apply to Lt. Bohn's era. The other ideas include the purchase of the pistol from another officer or NCO who owned the pistol. Also, a presentation piece from the Lt.'s unit, comrades, men etc. I tend to agree that the German Army is unlikely to have allowed a military issue pistol to be inscribed in the manner of the pistol in question, there's little doubt that the Luger WAS military issue at one time and that something unusual has happened here. The inscription is unusual and it's a Luger I'd like to own.... whatever the explaination for it's existence.