Here is my "P.D. Lueneschloss / Solingen"-marked Polizei bayonet. From research on this forum I believe that I have correctly identified the property markings of this long model, slotted, issued sidearm as follows:
SF90=Schuetzpolizei of the Frankfurt/Oder administarative district, weapon number 90.
I believe the black leather scabbard is correct for Schuetzpolizei.
The leather buffer washer is present, but the red felt insert is missing from the rifle slot.
Interesting is that the above-referenced stampings have been "X"d-out or cancelled, with a new pair of matching serial property (I presume) numbers - "3003" - having then been stamped underneath the previous ones located on the top silvered fitting of the scabbard, and repeated on the langet or crossguard.
There is a "WaffenAmt" symbol stamped on the top spine of the blade, and what I read as being a letter "W" stamped into the "U-shaped" groove where the bayonet would fit to the rifle.
I would be grateful if forum members could explain the second set of numerals and reason therefor (re-issued, perhaps?); as well as clarify the meaning of the letter "W".
Thanks,
John
SF90=Schuetzpolizei of the Frankfurt/Oder administarative district, weapon number 90.
I believe the black leather scabbard is correct for Schuetzpolizei.
The leather buffer washer is present, but the red felt insert is missing from the rifle slot.
Interesting is that the above-referenced stampings have been "X"d-out or cancelled, with a new pair of matching serial property (I presume) numbers - "3003" - having then been stamped underneath the previous ones located on the top silvered fitting of the scabbard, and repeated on the langet or crossguard.
There is a "WaffenAmt" symbol stamped on the top spine of the blade, and what I read as being a letter "W" stamped into the "U-shaped" groove where the bayonet would fit to the rifle.
I would be grateful if forum members could explain the second set of numerals and reason therefor (re-issued, perhaps?); as well as clarify the meaning of the letter "W".
Thanks,
John
Comment