9mm Glisenti or what? L.B.C M.17 and L.B.C. -- M.17 --

Here I found 2 differently stamped 9mm (Glisenti??) from LBC, marked M17. But the 2 variants have 2 different markings (and Fonts), one just L.B.C M.17, and the other one L.B-.C. plus 2 dashes on 3 and 9 o clock and at 6 o clock the M.17

What means the M17, and which significance have the 2 dashes in the second headstamp??

upper two without dashes…second row with dashes (and different fontsize

Forgot: all of them with trucated cone nonmagnetic brass jacketed fmj

M for Milano and 17 for 1917 I think.

I cannot be definitive about the meaning of the two marks, but
here is what I found in my research for an IAA article on this headstamp,
copied directly from my article:

“It will be noted from the headstamp illustrations for the Leon Beaux Company
that some of them have two lines on the headstamp, on either side of the primer,
while others do not. Cartridges disassembled revealed that among the few
specimens from which bullets were pulled, ones without the lines did had no
over-powder wads and those with the lines did have the wad. It is possible, therefore,
that the lines identify ammunition intended for submachine guns. This is conjecture
on the part of the author, who has no documentation, other than the mentioned observation,
to corroborate his opinion.”

Photos in the article show that the lines existed on 1917 and 1918 L.B.C. headstamps.
The “M” before the dates does stand for Milano, as JP suggests. In the paragraph
before the one I copied here, there is mention that this L.B.C. M.## style headstamp
exists with the dates 16, 17 and 18, while those with the lines, observed by me, are
only on the 17 and 18 dates.

Reference: Woodin Laboratory by John Moss, photo assistance from Lew Curtis,
“The 9 m/m Glisenti Model 1910 Cartridge,” IAA Issue 454, March/April 2007,
Pages 10 - 24 (quoted paragraphs on Page17).

John Moss

Thanks Peter. I can only agree with John. . I have the M16 & M17 without the two dashes in my collection, but not the M18, though I have seen it in collections.

I have the M17 and M18 with the dashes. My M17 has the strange “B” like the one you show at lower right, but I have never seen an M17 with the normal “B” like your round at the lower left. The variations in their headstamp bunters is interesting.


My own actual collection of Glisenti 9 mm rounds is quite mediocre.
Much of the information in my article was of course due to the
courtesy of many participants in the two years I researched that
work. In my own collection, I have only L.B.C. M.16 without the
dashes on the headstamp. With the dashes, I have only – L.B.C. – M.17
but mine has the normal “B” in the factory initials, and – L.B.C. – M.18,
which has much smaller headstamp letters.

I started out not collecting any dates, but recently, due to the article
began saving dates in Glisenti because of variations like those discussed
here. I have not had much luck in doing that, but then I don’t get anywhere
normally, other than SLICS, where one runs into these cartridges.

John Moss

just a stupid question.
how do you know they are glisenti and not parabellum ?

JP - We know from the headstamp style, the shape of the
bullet, and the dates of manufacture. Also, in some cases if
we have them, from the box labels, which in the case of the
military, show the designation of “910” which is the year model
of the adopted version of the Glisenti 9 mm Pistol, and perhaps
of the cartridge as well.

When we speak of SMG cartridges in this caliber, they were for
the various versions of the Pistola Mitragliatrice Modello 1915, often
referred to as the Villar Perosa, designed by Revelli, or also known as
V.P. Modello 1915. That weapon was actually two separate firearms
joined together, with a bipod and a spade-type grip (no buttstock).
Later came the O.V.P. (Officine di Villar Perosa), which was a true,
shoulder-mounted machine carbine with a folding spike-type bayonet.

One must use some caution in identifying Italian 9 mm rounds as glisenti
based on a truncated bullet, especially in post-WW2 commercial loadings,
as Fiocchi Lecco loads truncated bullets as one of their offerings in 9 mm
Parabellum. Early Fiocchi loadings that one would think are 9 mm Glisenti
are found in original boxes marked 9 mm Parabellum, also.

There is no question of the identification as Glisenti-type cartridges, however,
of any of the loadings mentioned on this thread.

John Moss

hello John,

I was just asking that because in absence of the box or without taking apart the ctge to weight the powder I thought it could be difficult to know if it was a parabellum or a glisenti ctge (both having exactly the same bullet)

The reason you know at once it’s a Glisenti ctge is because it is a military hstp from WWI.
9 parabellum ctge was not in Italian army use during this period of time, but only Glisenti.


JP - Am not sure I fully understand your comments. Your second paragraph,
which is in agreement with one of the identification factors I mentioned, seems
to contradict you first paragraph’s last words with the statement “both having
exactly the same bullet.”

Actually, prior to the post-WW2 period, that is NOT usually the case. With
the adoption of the Modello 1938 Submachine Gun in 1938, the 9 mm
Parabellum caliber ammunition for it was clearly marked as “9M38” on the
headstamps, and box labels. They are not fit for Glisenti pistols, and probably
not for the early 1915 and 1923 Models of the Beretta Pistol. Italy did not use,
as a standard military weapon, any 9 mm Parabellum-caliber pistol, until c.1951.
The Standard Military Pistol was the Beretta Model 1934 in caliber 9 mm Corto
and for the Air Force, and some police use, the Beretta Model 1935 in caliber
7.65 mm Browning.

There are two instances of headstamp confusion due, in the first instance a
Fiocchi cartridge that has the same headstamp, albeit with larger letters, as
a known Glisenti rounds, “FIOCCHI 1918.” This was always thought to be
a Glisenti until “Forensic” from this Forum found a box clear marked for 9 MM
Luger. The box was actually labeled in the French Language, not Italian, as
Grimaldi’s notes indicate that these were made for captured Model 1915 Mauser
pistols, which is assumed to the the C.96 type made during WWI in caliber
9 mm Para, commonly referred to as “Red Nine” Mausers due to a large figure
9 carved into the wood grips and painted red, to differentiate it from those in
German Service in caliber 7.63 x 25 mm Mauser. It is thought that the 25-round
square, French language-labeled box was actually a post-war packaging for
commercial sales. I don’t want to rewrite my article here, but I have my own
theory about this ammo and what weapon it was for, explained in my article,
referenced earlier on in this thread, on pages 16 and 17.

The second confusion is with a BEAUX cartridge headstamped “BEAUX
CAL.9” and without the word “Parabellum” in any form on the headstamp.
The headstamp lettering would indicate it is likely contemporary to the
headstamp “BEAUX 1910,” on which the date expresses the cartridge (and
pistol) Model, not the date of manufacture. Thoughts on the BEAUX rounds
are also covered on Page 17 of my article.

Commercial 9 mm Glisenti cartridges from the Post-WW2 era have the truncated,
but are only caliber-marked “9MM” without Fiocchi’s usual reference to Parabellum,
Luger, or 9M38, all indicating 9 x 19 mm Parabellum caliber ammunition. The truncated
bullet was also loaded in this caliber, but properly headstamp for the higher-powered

I hope this settles the questions involved with identifying the 9 mm Glisenti round as opposed
to 9 mm Parabellum of Italian manufacture. To my knowledge, the 9 mm Glisenti was never
made in any countries other than Italy and the USA (U.S.C.Co., Maxim USA, and Western
Ctg. Co., all on contract for Italy).

John Moss

hello John

  1. I was talking of course of the truncated round ctges.

  2. I asked the question because I don’t have the N°454 IAA newspaper (it stops at 446 in the member section and mine start at 455!).,

  3. But you gave me the answers I would like to know about the “Fiocchi 1918” and the “Beaux Cal 9”.

  4. About the “Beaux 1910” are you sure it is not “Beaux 910” ?

  5. I used to have a very old catalogue from Fiocchi in which were the two ctges : for Glisenti and for Parabellum. I always wondered if it was from before or after WWI.

If I look at my notes it could be from before 1916 (I don’t remember why exactly, perhaps somebody told me that because there was 7.65 Pickert ctge inside)

Anyway, I don’t have it anymore, it disappears by error among the documentation I got rid of it !

The hstps of the two 9 mm ctges were not shown and I was wondering what they could be.

Thanks for the info


JP - Yes, the actual BEAUX 1910 cartridge that is in most collections
has a four-digit date. In an old Beaux catalog, which I don’t have,
there is a picture of a headstamp " • BEAUX • 910 " but I have found no
collector who has this headstamp. Sometimes catalog-pictured headstamps
are not accurately drawn, but then once in a while, a headstamp is found
that matches a catalog drawing much to the surprise of interested
parties. Of course, all of the true Glisenti loadings have the
truncated bullet, even the American ones.

I regret not collecting dates originally in this cartridge, but then, I
didn’t know 55 years ago that I would sometimes write long articles that
I researched for anywhere from six months to, in the case of the
Glisenti, over two years. There are still things we don’t know about
it, of course. The best research was done by Alessio Grimaldi, of
Italy, but when he had some problem with officials over some of his
cartridges, unfortunately he got into a rage about it and destroyed or
damaged most of his collection, and I don’t think anywhere near all of
his notes were saved. I think Philippe got some of them, or at least
had done some research in them.

I started collecting all dates in 9 x 18 Makarov because I collect
everything to do with that pistol, including the pistols, all
accessories and of course, the cartridge and cartridge boxes. When I
wrote a large article about the Wise, Maxim and USCCo firms, which began
because of my interest in the Glisenti cartridge, I wanted to confirm
all the months of production for Maxim and USCCo .45 ACP production, so
did my best to acquire them all. That started me collecting dates in
.45. I still don’t, and will not, collect dates in other auto pistol
calibers. Unfortunately, there are not the large quantities of 9 mm
Glisenti specimens around anymore, like there were when I first started

John Moss

Sorry for the small talk on my last entry. I thought I was answering
a PM and did not realize it would go onto the forum.

John Moss

Gentlemen, it’s not that I want to disturb some conclusions about the dashes on the L.B. C cartridge ;-)
But I found one with only one dash. The headstamp is not mint, but there are no traces at all of a dash on 3 o’clock…

Who knows what that means?


Almost certainly a broken or badly worn bunter. Note the
letter “L” in your photo, and that the dash at the 9 o/clock
position is poorly stamped, running off at the top in a sharp

This, of itself, does not disturb or change any conclusions.
You would have to pull the bullet out to see if there is an over-powder
wad in the headstamp with the dash on it, and also the one without
either dash to see it if does NOT have the wad.

These Cartridges were made by The Leon Beaux Company. I don’t
recall see such a poorly done headstamp from them before, but in
time of war, crap happens!

John Moss

Thanks Lew,

Ok, so I think it must be a broken bunter, there is no trace at all of a dash, dispite the further damaging in the headstamp.
I will not pull the bullet off, I only have one of these, so i’ll keep it original ;-)


To everybody that contributed to the above post I found 2 Glisentis between my things
with the stamps B.P B-14 and B.P 16 truncated bullets where do they fit in? any idea?


Not sure I know what you mean by “where do they fit in.” The
two of them are from the Pirotecnico di Bologna factory, Italy, in 1914 and 1916,
respectively. They are common military ball rounds intended for
the Glisenti Model 1910 pistol and the Brixia Pistol, in the case of the
1914-dated cartridge, and for the Glisenti, Brixia AND the Beretta
Model 1915, and possibly the Villar Perosa MG Model 1915 as well.

The initials B.P. at the top of the headstamps are those of Boragine, Pietro,
the Chief inspector at the factory at that time.

When you typed the headstamp “B.P. 16” you likely left out the initial
“B”, followed by a dash before the date. If you did not leave it out,
then it is a partial headstamp. Partial headstamps are known, but I
am not familiar with one the says only “B.P. 16.” You might take another look
at your 1916-dated cartridge to see if the headstamp is not actually “B.P B-16.”

Again, these were simply ball cartridges for the Italian Government, during the

John Moss

Thank you John for your reply no I looked at both of those with a glass very carefully before I wrote
yes the stamps are very week and I wondered why the one had the B-14 and the other only the 16
but I am sure the one only shows the 16 but the possibility of a bunter omission is there but then you
know 2 years during that war in particular for Italy produced tremendous changes and shortages.
Thanks again Sherryl

Last week I found another cartridge LBC _ M.17. The same as my other, earlier mentioned, the one with one dash, only this one has a better headstamp, less damage but including the strange “B”. And for sure, again one dash, left side. Must be a very coincidence this one has also a missing bunter?
Because of the repleys above and the article in the IAA magazine #454 I was very curious, so I pulled the bullet out. (pff…expensive cartridge…) There is a wad inside, brownisch, looks horsehair or something like that. Powderweight is 3.3 grain, wad weight 1,9 grain, bullet weigh123,9 grain.




1 Like

Just a side note…a recent
FIOCCHI Catalogue shows a photo of manufacture of
9mm Mo.910 cartridges in WWI…and the crates reused for In- factory shifting of cartridge cases are Marked (military)
“Cartuccie 9mm Mo.910 Per
(For Machinegun)
Obviously the Villar-Perosa.
Now whether this is simply a packing description, or an actual different loading, I don’t
Check it out.