Printable View
If I presented a No.4 with an painting of a lopsided bull on the stock as a Picasso original, it might be real; without proof however, it might just as well have been painted by my 6 year old cousin.
In any event, it would not have opened up such an interesting and enlightening debate. Thank you, Superbee, wherever you are.
@ villiers: If you know anyone still alive (Richard Law is dead) with more knowledge of what happened to German weaponry, their variations and markings, including the capture and volkssturm rifles than Mike Steves (mrfarb's real name) then I implore you to contact the man and have him weigh in.
As it stands, Mike is the author of the most recent and authoritative reference book in existence on this subject and he considers it to not be a legitimate capture rifle. I honestly don't know what people are expecting in terms of additional expert opinion?? It's as it Peter Laidler told someone they have a fake No.5 Sten and then that person trying to argue with him that he's wrong, or Scott Duff telling someone their Gas Trap garand is a repro and that person refusing to even consider Scott might be right.
In absence of your knowing of a more authoritative source, Mike is THE expert on this stuff.
No afriad not Chris,it's a dot coded ZB26.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brit plumber
atb Kevin
Just to reinforce the point made above by Son......here's a picture of a Feldgendarmerie badge removed from the original owner's tunic by my father-in-law in late 1944 when the original owner "no longer had a use for it": Clearly the eagle is facing left:
Attachment 20429
For comparison, here, on another of his souvenirs (SS EM Dagger), the eagle is facing right:
Attachment 20430
And for avodance of any confusion, these are 100% genuine relics handed down to my son by his grandfather who took them off the original owners. He had no need or reason to fake these...they were readily available at the time and did not have the fiscal value that may be attributed to them now :D
Thanks to Son and OxfordAndy the problem of the eagle facing the wrong way (in the opinion of many) is solved. Seeing as this part of the puzzle is solved we can hopefully find more information on the other strange markings on the Lee Enfield.
Since the eagle in the police emblem that OxfordAndy posted is facing opposite of the ones in question on the rifle, I'm not sure what would be "solved". But no matter...the direction the eagles are facing never was the real issue here.
In the "opinion of many", things were settled when Mr. Steves weighed in. His first quote on the issue:
"I'll tell you what, that is about the most hokey stamps I've ever seen. Not real folks, someone boosted it up for profit (although not sure who would want something like this). Germans didn't put dates under eagles."
Once again...why wasn't this rifle brought up in any of the Third Reich collectors' forums (fora?)? That seems to me to be the place for this debate...although I suspect it would be a very short one there. Has there been even one experienced collector of WWII German militaria that has spoken in favor of this rifle? That's certainly where any real and relevant historical evidence on German protocol and regulation with regard to the marking of captured weapons is likely to come from.
The more appropriate issue for this board would seem to be whether or not a rifle would make it through the Australian Army's formal FTR process in the 1950s with enemy capture markings, spurious or otherwise, intact (Personally, I don't think it would have).
jrhead75, I have no dog in this fight.
The point about the way in which the eagles are facing is being used as proof positive that the rifle has been faked.
The point of posting the pics above is to prove that there is no "right or wrong" way for the eagle to face. Party and military emblems, or even different parts of the German armed forces, had variations on the eagle emblem.
Take a look at any wartime pictures on a wide range of subject matters covering emblems on buildings to uniforms and decorations, you will find the same thing.
There maybe other reasons to question the authenticity of this rifle but to seek to use the direction of the head as "proof positive" that this is a fake seems unwise to me.
I agree...that's kind of my point. The issue of the "wrong-way facing eagle" was a bit of a red herring all around. It all started with one poster over on Gunboards saying something to the effect of "Isn't the eagle supposed to be facing the other way?" and got carried on from there.Quote:
There maybe other reasons to question the authenticity of this rifle but to seek to use the direction of the head as "proof positive" that this is a fake seems unwise to me.
The direction the eagle's facing is the least of that rifle's problems...
Question, would eagles facing in different directions on the same weapon point more towards it being a fake than legit?
This is a true Q as i have no idea.
I've looked through the photo collection on the CD/ROM I bought from BobinOhio (k98 collector of some note on GB), detailed photo studies of approx. 30 rifles. Several with prewar Weimar eagles, and including a couple foreign capture/make Mausers pressed into German service. I also took a good look at my own '42 BNZ closet find K98, and my copy of Law's "Backbone of the Wehrmacht". Every single eagle I've seen stamped on a rifle is looking to the viewer's left, that is...over it's own right wing. Not one is looking the other way. So I'd have to say yes...a "backward" facing eagle would at least seem to point to fakery in this context.