Another find! 1906 Dutch.

[Ron Wood]

Albert,
The reissue does not detract from the value of the pistol at all, in fact, it only adds to the colorful background of the piece. The original AO marking indicates that it was first issued to a Fortress Artillery unit. The brass plate is of course for the 3rd Company, 3rd Infantry Battalion, weapon #5. The reissue occurred some time after 1939 when the use of the brass plate on the left side of the frame was initiated. Without seeing the back side of the holster, I suspect that it is a second type KNIL holster rather than a modified first type. This would make it totally correct for this pistol, as Pete has indicated, since the second type dates from June of 1939 making it contemporary with the reissue of the pistol.

Your reference to the â??LARâ?� marking of the serial number on the top of the barrel is not quite correct. LAR indicates that this is a â??dateâ?� stamp, which is correct. LAR goes on to say this is the date of refinishing/refurbishing. Another interpretation is that this is the date that the barrel was placed into service. Since there are a few known examples of Dutch Lugers with the original factory barrel but also having a date stamp probably indicates the date when the weapon was released from reserve stocks and placed into service, and the armorer dutifully added the date stamp as he had done for all the other weapon barrels being placed into service. Very likely all three interpretations are correct.

Murrayâ??s gun and holster are beautiful examples and once again I congratulate him on an excellent acquisition. The only critical comment that I might make is that the cleaning rod is not a Dutch type. The Dutch rod is slotted at the tip to hold the cleaning material and not seriated.