DWM Commercial 9mmP

[sheepherder]

It would be nice if you posted the pics here on the Forum instead of PhotoBucket so that those of us on a government computer/ISP could see them and know what is being discussed.

[Kyrie]

Don,

Apology accepted, and I sincerely tender my own apology to you for my own intemperate remarks. Missed communication indeed.

I began collecting Lugers back in the day when Kenyon was about the only resource available (unless one counts Datig), and Jan Still’s works wouldn’t be published for another twenty-five or thirty years. It’s hard for collectors of today (who have had access to the works of Still, Walter, Gortz, Sturgess, et. al. for a significant part of their lives) to appreciate just how much the 1920s and the guns produced in them were nearly a complete mystery back in the day.

I’m not just aware of Still’s work and new nomenclature (20 DWM, Alphabet DWM, 29 DWM), I’m an enormous fan of his creation of the terminology and the underlying work that produced it. For a caveman era Luger collector like myself it was wonderfully clarifying and brought some badly needed order to the literature (and the pricing!) of late Imperial, Weimar, and very early third Reich Lugers.

But this new system of classification of, well, call it “interregnum Lugers” is focused almost entirely on guns intended for use in Germany by the German armed forces (in which I include the German police).

It does not address the tons of Lugers not destined for use, or even necessarily sale, in Germany and these guns cannot be classed within the limits imposed by 20 DWM, Alphabet DWM, and 29 DWM. These are guns for which I still used the term “1920 Commercial” because there is still no more descriptive term.

I’m honestly not willfully misusing the term “1920 Commercial” when I should be using “Alphabet DWM”. I’m using 1920 Commercial for Lugers that are outside the underlying rules that define the usage of 20 DWM, Alphabet DWM, or 29 DWM.

[DonVoigt]

Quite true about the "old" books and your explanation fully explains the "issue".
We are indeed fortunate today to have all the great books on all facets of lugers that are available.

We do lack an "agreed" name for those lugers, I don't know what to call them as "they" extend in time from 1919 to the early 1930s.

Maybe they are "depression lugers"? I was not being derogatory when I called the pistol a "mongrel", though it probably sounded like it- maybe it and the many similar ones are just "orphans".

[Ron Wood]

While some may choose to call this piece a 1920s Commercial, it is at best a "cottage industry" product of that era. Since it bears no proofs it is not a factory made item. Nice looking.

[Kyrie]

Originally Posted by Dwight Gruber

The shield with a slash is a DWM inspector's mark.

--Dwight

Dwight,

I'd be very interested in learning more on this subject. This mark is, in my experience, not often encountered. Is there any primary source information concerning the circumstances under which it was used? Absent primary source info, has there been any observable pattern in its usage?

TIA!

Kyrie

[Ben M.]

kyrie, thanks for your kindly offer. just wanted to learn about maker. i have shooter guns and not holster. so am like you.

[Kyrie]

Ben,

You're very welcome.

[Kyrie]

Originally Posted by Ron Wood

While some may choose to call this piece a 1920s Commercial, it is at best a "cottage industry" product of that era. Since it bears no proofs it is not a factory made item. Nice looking.

I think I may have to disagree here. When it comes to 1920 Commercial variations we seldom have any hard information on where, by whom, or even the year in which such a variation was made. This example may have been produced by some individual gun smith, or by some small enterprise, or by DWM; the gun itself is ambiguous and we are left to speculate on its origin.

If you care to see the gun as a product of a family run "cottage industry", you may certainly do so, and that's as valid a view as any other.

Also, it might be good to remember that not all factory made guns have proof marks. That's especially true of Germany during the early to late 1920s. That was a time during which law and custom frequently came in a poor second to economic necessity and/or political beliefs and fears. I could actually make a good, if highly speculative (!) case for this gun being one of a short sub Rosa DWM run of sidearms for one of the Freikorps companies, with the shield stamp on the barrel signifying DWM internal proof/Freikorps acceptance.

All this is what makes these darn 1920 Commercial guns so frustrating for people who are made uncomfortable by the unknown. They are, I think, representative of a country for which the wheels have fallen off.

Just my $0.02 worth.

[Ron Wood]

Fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion. By the way, the shield stamp has nothing to do with Freikorps. It was in use long before the 1920s, being found on Model 1900 and 1906 examples. It just signifies that there was something about the barrel that required additional scrutiny and when found acceptable and/or corrected it received the inspector's mark.

[Kyrie]

I understand that the shield stamp is a DWM stamp and did not intend to suggest any direct connection between the stamp and the Freikorps.

Rather what I was suggesting in my speculation was DWM used the shield stamp as a substitute for the normal firing proof on the barrel to indicate clandestine acceptance by a non-government military/police custom, such as one of the Freikorps companies.

[Ron Wood]

Ah, I understand your speculation. However, DWM would not be allowed to use an inspector's stamp for a firing proof. Firing proof was governed by law, not DWM, consequently the type of marking was stipulated by law.

[Dwight Gruber]

And proof firing and the application of firing proofs are performed by a government entity, not the factory.

--Dwight

[Kyrie]

Originally Posted by Ron Wood

Ah, I understand your speculation. However, DWM would not be allowed to use an inspector's stamp for a firing proof. Firing proof was governed by law, not DWM, consequently the type of marking was stipulated by law.

I understand your point and, under normal circumstances, would fully agree. But the circumstances in Germany in the 1920 were not ordinary. Laws were obeyed, or circumvented, or just ignored as a matter of course due to overriding financial, political, and personal reasons.

Let’s consider some of the acts that show context:

Mauser continues to make and sell C96 pistols chambered for the 9mmP cartridge, and hides the production and sale by falsification of the records.

The German army hides as much of its inventory of heavy weapons as possible in Swedish artillery parks with the assistance of Krupp and the connivance of the Swedish government.

The German army moves its research and testing of the next generation of armored fighting vehicle to the Soviet Union to avoid interference by Versailles treaty inspectors.

What passes for the German government unofficially uses the Freikorps companies to suppress internal rebellions (e.g. Berlin - Spartacus revolt, Breman, Munich) and impose German policy externally (Latvia, Estonia), and to conduct political assignations of political opponents in Germany (notably that of Walther Rathenau).

In this mix a violation of proof law is small potatoes, and I’m inclined to the opinion that Berlin and the proof house would tend to ignore any violation of which they became aware; especially if such a violation advanced Berlin’s goals.

[kurusu]

I tend to agree that rules, in the after war Germany, went out the window.

[RichSr]

"conduct political assignations of political opponents in Germany (notably that of Walther Rathenau)." May we assume English is not your native language and you meant "assassination"?

[Kyrie]

Originally Posted by RichSr

"conduct political assignations of political opponents in Germany (notably that of Walther Rathenau)." May we assume English is not your native language and you meant "assassination"?

You may assume what you wish, but it might be less risky to assume I am a poor typist, or just have a overactive auto-correct and I don't proof read well :-)

[cirelaw]

Congrads Larry member since 2002! You should be awarded a luger wrist watch!

[Kyrie]

Originally Posted by cirelaw

Congrads Larry member since 2002! You should be awarded a luger wrist watch!

I actually go back even farther. I was a member of the forum that was this forum's predecessor:

http://www.lugerforum.com/

[Thor]

I liked this Luger, congrats! A couple of things I noticed, non relieved sear bar(early Military) and no safety paint. Enjoy!

[Dick Herman]

Add this to breaking the Versailles treaty agreement.
The German Weimar government and military had found ways to clandestinely circumvent the weapons manufacturing rules set by the IMKK. In 1925 secret codes were developed to hide type of weapons and their manufacturers. The secret code consisted of a letter followed by a number. Mauser covert production codes started with S/42 in 1934. The “S” designated small arms such as the P.08. The “42": identified Mauser-Werke A.G. as the disguised illegal producer.