Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
I’ve been trying to research my 1897’s, including my WW1 era trench (huge thanks to our walking encyclopedia Bert). The mystery of why some are US and bomb marked, but the large majority aren’t, is intriguing, with many speculating, (or making pronouncements). One thing that both answered questions and fueled speculation was the Richmond PD 1897’s, or “Ivanhoe guns” that were sold in 2004. Despite having documentation the guns were in US Army inventory ca 1921 before being transferred to the Virginia National Guard, then going to Richmond PD ca 1924, none of those 74 guns were martially marked, according to Bruce Canfield. A couple have apparently turned up marked subsequently, further confusing folks. My trench gun is two digits off one of the lower numbered Richmond guns and is also unmarked.
Some have floated the idea that the unmarked guns were too late to go overseas so they weren’t marked. That doesn’t make sense to me, since the Richmond PD guns span a fairly wide range, 673XXX to 705XXX, and why would guns in a rush to get to the front get marked, but guns in Army inventory for several years, remain unmarked? The fact that unmarked Richmond PD guns turned up later as marked guns, even begs the question of how many of the, according to Canfield, 20% marked guns, are fraudulently marked?
Anyone have any personal ideas of the whys and wherefores?
My understanding is when the war came to an end the 97’s in inventory that had not gone through inspection did not get marked.
Chuck said
My understanding is when the war came to an end the 97’s in inventory that had not gone through inspection did not get marked.
Yeah I’ve read that speculation as well. But I have seen fairly high sn trench guns with US markings. And why not inspect guns in inventory? I don’t think we see that with other US military guns do we?
I have not yet arrived at a theory behind this mystery that I would be willing to put money one. The one thing that is positively a fact, is that many of the so called “martially marked” WW I Model 1897 Trench Guns were not marked by the U.S. government! Having stated that, I can usually identify the fake ordnance marked guns.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
UpInTheBigTrees said
Chuck said
My understanding is when the war came to an end the 97’s in inventory that had not gone through inspection did not get marked.
Yeah I’ve read that speculation as well. But I have seen fairly high sn trench guns with US markings. And why not inspect guns in inventory? I don’t think we see that with other US military guns do we?
The Military did not issue guns in order by serial number. When the war started many trench guns were made from civilian purchases along with the inventory Winchester had. My guess is that when the war ended so did a lot of things that were no longer required.
I keep a data base on these guns, and the ones that have the hand stamped martial markings usually fall into tight groups of serial numbers. By the time the serials get to about 685,000, the hand stamped marked guns disappear. There are, of course, a few exceptions to this.
Tom D said
I keep a data base on these guns, and the ones that have the hand stamped martial markings usually fall into tight groups of serial numbers. By the time the serials get to about 685,000, the hand stamped marked guns disappear. There are, of course, a few exceptions to this.
From what I have read there is no official list of serial numbers. So someday what you have may be the one. 
Mine is E684921 and is not stamped.
Tom D said
I keep a data base on these guns, and the ones that have the hand stamped martial markings usually fall into tight groups of serial numbers. By the time the serials get to about 685,000, the hand stamped marked guns disappear. There are, of course, a few exceptions to this.
I also have a survey list. Currently, I have (205) WW I Model 1897 Trench Guns documented, of which (70) are ordnance marked.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
I have not yet arrived at a theory behind this mystery that I would be willing to put money one. The one thing that is positively a fact, is that many of the so called “martially marked” WW I Model 1897 Trench Guns were not marked by the U.S. government! Having stated that, I can usually identify the fake ordnance marked guns.Bert
The more I read the more I see what you have found to be true. The fact that according to Canfield, some of the Richmond guns have turned up with ordnance marks they didn’t have when sold in 2004, really makes that point.
Imagine, taking an absolutely documented US trench gun, and then faking the stamps on it. Idiots….
Chuck said
UpInTheBigTrees said
Chuck said
My understanding is when the war came to an end the 97’s in inventory that had not gone through inspection did not get marked.
Yeah I’ve read that speculation as well. But I have seen fairly high sn trench guns with US markings. And why not inspect guns in inventory? I don’t think we see that with other US military guns do we?
The Military did not issue guns in order by serial number. When the war started many trench guns were made from civilian purchases along with the inventory Winchester had. My guess is that when the war ended so did a lot of things that were no longer required.
But the Army didn’t do that with other guns acquired after the end of the war. Just puzzling why they didn’t mark guns owned by and in the Army’s inventory.
UpInTheBigTrees said
Bert H. said
I have not yet arrived at a theory behind this mystery that I would be willing to put money one. The one thing that is positively a fact, is that many of the so called “martially marked” WW I Model 1897 Trench Guns were not marked by the U.S. government! Having stated that, I can usually identify the fake ordnance marked guns.
Bert
The more I read the more I see what you have found to be true. The fact that according to Canfield, some of the Richmond guns have turned up with ordnance marks they didn’t have when sold in 2004, really makes that point.
Imagine, taking an absolutely documented US trench gun, and then faking the stamps on it. Idiots….
Greedy idiots! 
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
There is a 100% WW1 martially marked Trenchgun on Jack the Dogs site. It is a real nice one. Don’t know how to do links, so look it up. It’s at over $2,000 now with 8 days to go. $10,000? Quite possible.
According to Eric Archer, I had the nicest M1897 Trenchgun he had ever seen. It was 99% and US marked. Got it from Felix Bedlan. In a stupid moment, I sold it for $13,500. Big Larry
Is this the one? Darrin Smith posted on a previous thread, under Trench Guns.
https://www.gunauction.com/buy/17380720
Anthony
Big Larry said
There is a 100% WW1 martially marked Trenchgun on Jack the Dogs site. It is a real nice one. Don’t know how to do links, so look it up. It’s at over $2,000 now with 8 days to go. $10,000? Quite possible.According to Eric Archer, I had the nicest M1897 Trenchgun he had ever seen. It was 99% and US marked. Got it from Felix Bedlan. In a stupid moment, I sold it for $13,500. Big Larry
If the US markings were genuine, that also tends to contradict some that say only guns being sent overseas were marked.
Bert H. said
UpInTheBigTrees said
Bert H. said
I have not yet arrived at a theory behind this mystery that I would be willing to put money one. The one thing that is positively a fact, is that many of the so called “martially marked” WW I Model 1897 Trench Guns were not marked by the U.S. government! Having stated that, I can usually identify the fake ordnance marked guns.
Bert
The more I read the more I see what you have found to be true. The fact that according to Canfield, some of the Richmond guns have turned up with ordnance marks they didn’t have when sold in 2004, really makes that point.
Imagine, taking an absolutely documented US trench gun, and then faking the stamps on it. Idiots….
Greedy idiots!
Indeed.
I guess the lack of documentation on these guns, and the number of fakes, convince some guys they have to make even genuine trench guns, as said in the auction above, “extra nice”.
If I were to buy a marked gun, I would have either Bert, or a firearms tool mark expert, examine the stamps. I can see that becoming a requirement in the future for serious collectors.
UpInTheBigTrees said
Big Larry said
There is a 100% WW1 martially marked Trenchgun on Jack the Dogs site. It is a real nice one. Don’t know how to do links, so look it up. It’s at over $2,000 now with 8 days to go. $10,000? Quite possible.
According to Eric Archer, I had the nicest M1897 Trenchgun he had ever seen. It was 99% and US marked. Got it from Felix Bedlan. In a stupid moment, I sold it for $13,500. Big Larry
If the US markings were genuine, that also tends to contradict some that say only guns being sent overseas were marked.
Based on what I am seeing, the US ordnance markings on the gun in question are authentic.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
UpInTheBigTrees said
Big Larry said
There is a 100% WW1 martially marked Trenchgun on Jack the Dogs site. It is a real nice one. Don’t know how to do links, so look it up. It’s at over $2,000 now with 8 days to go. $10,000? Quite possible.
According to Eric Archer, I had the nicest M1897 Trenchgun he had ever seen. It was 99% and US marked. Got it from Felix Bedlan. In a stupid moment, I sold it for $13,500. Big Larry
If the US markings were genuine, that also tends to contradict some that say only guns being sent overseas were marked.
Based on what I am seeing, the US ordnance markings on the gun in question are authentic.
Bert
That’s good to know.
In my research, I’ve been looking at lots of past auctions and sold guns. The majority seem to be ordnance marked, even, maybe especially, the advertised repros and obvious fakes. Clearly, folks seem to feel like it’s not a trench without them.
1 Guest(s)
