UBB.threads Forums Edged Weapons SA & NSKK Dagger Forum MY NEW SA PUMA DAGGER

Gentlemen,

This issue of Joe Linge’s Dagger, and other similar examples, is becoming something of a cause célèbre - because it really has opened up a whole can of worms. However, that is what this forum is about, and all of us in the GDC community give our opinion in the hope of advancing other peoples’ understanding, or improving our own knowledge.

To reply to Jon Shallcross; Yes, you are right about the Office of the SA Leadership and the Order 1 Nr. 3707. I had forgotten about that one, but it does appear in translated form in Atwood (page 36). The Order is dated 21 February, 1934 (not March) and primarily relates to the SA Honour Dagger (Röhm dedication) and the Standard Service Dagger. I acknowledge that the translation does state that SA Officers are permitted to present their comrade(s) with SA Daggers on special occasions; and furthermore it stipulates that such daggers must conform in exterior appearance to that of the Standard Service Dagger.

OK, I was playing Devil’s Advocate when I suggested that an owner marking up his own dagger with his name and/or SA Service Number was altering the exterior appearance (I was a just being a little provocative). It would seem to me to make perfect sense to have your personal dagger so marked in order to identify it as your own personal property.

So would it be out of order to have your own dagger engraved with your name by a professional engraver? I am going to make a contentious statement here - but I think it is worth making. It is my considered opinion that a professional engraver might well have advertised for, or solicited, engraving commissions from SA members, who would like their daggers to be personalized with their own name - and to do so in a highly artistic manner. As this exterior decoration on the dagger does not imply any presentation from one official to another, it is not in essence contravening any of the conditions stipulated in Order 1 Nr. 3707.

So it is my best guess that such an engraving could be authentic - and it also explains why there are different makers with this engraving, and different SA Gruppe marks (on some of them, but not necessarily all of them). The engraver solicits business, offers options of design versions, advertises his business, and receives some quantity of business as a result. The business comes in from all over the Reich (and believe me, local businesses were not always chosen for their services - there was a well established system of mail-order business for goods and services - a bit like your American Sears-Roebuck mail-order business). So it is highly possible that a competent engraver working in some German town - let’s say Duisburg (I have no evidence for this, it is hypothetical) could advertise for business, and get responses from as far away as Saarlouis, Munich, Nurnberg, Kiel, etc. etc.

It seems that we have five or six surviving examples of an engraver’s work which appears to be distinctively identifiable (at least) to the same hand, or school of workmanship. Supposing our engraver’s campaign for work produced commissions for 500 examples (varied designs). (Not a vast amount in a large nation with a population of some 40 million - 1936 estimate. There is a reasonable chance that some of those pieces survive - they were, after all, spread across the complete Reich.

I think that this scenario cannot be off-handedly written-off as improbable. By the same logic you would have to say that complete Röhm dedications were forbidden (and most clearly they were forbidden - after June, 1934). So how is it that so many survive? Could it be that the regulations concerning such pieces were flouted - or has somebody got a better idea?

So this brings me back to Joe Linge and his “Kurpfalz” dagger. We have about three schools of thought concerning this item........and similar pieces. To wit, as follows:
1) There are those who believe in the piece, and other similar items, implicitly. No problem there - if it makes you happy then that is the end of the matter (until you try to sell it - but that is another issue).
2) There are those of us who think Joe Linge’s dagger was tampered with, but we still believe that some of the other similar items are genuine. I place myself in this category, and whatever flak comes my way I will take it accordingly.
3) There are others who (genuinely and with integrity) believe that “tampered-with” daggers having exterior decoration were completely forbidden - and therefore this is a sign of sure fakery. I would not challenge this, but submit the proviso that there becames a point at which such unofficial modifications were finally forbidden - but that doesn’t prove they were eliminated from the scene.

So, OK, which piece(s) is/are wrong? Regarding Joe Linge’s “Kurpfalz” piece, I think it is wrong. This is not a wild guess. I think the use of the word “Kurpfalz” is improper. It is not as if this item is a gift, or some recogniution from the SA Gruppe Kurpfalz - if it was that, then surely that if it was honouring a person or achievement it would have been stated: “The best marksman in SA Gruppe Kurpfalz”; or “Gruppe Kurpfalz Hiking Prize, 1936” - or whatever. But it doesn’t do that, and therefore the name “Kurpfalz” is somewhat too bald and inexplicable. So, yes, these are my reasons for questioning the “Kurpfalz” dagger - that and the distinctions in the engraving.

My argument, as presented above, does not prove or disprove the authenticity of any of these daggers. However there are some pointers which I think are worth arguing about. I have made up a photo-montage of the top crossguard of several of these daggers, and I wish to present in order to highlight an observation. And everbody is invited to comment upon it as you see fit. Hopefully this image will transfer to the GDC site (but as I have had trouble with my images in the past - I might have to submit it through Dave Hohaus, or one of the other helpers who can assist me through my dotage. Here goes...........

Denny J. Roach, after careful consideration I think that your engraved SA dagger was genuine all along, and I suspect that some of our other associates also lean towards that conviction - have you noticed how they are not chasing Joe Linge to gain possession of his former dagger?

However, Denny, it must be said - that if you claim to have proof positive that your dagger was tampered with and that the engraving is false, then you ought to share it so that the rest of know how to spot this particular type of fraud. Isn't that what being a member of this community is all about. (You were brilliantly open about your doubts about the piece - and did share that bit with us. So why not draw back the curtain and show us the rest of the secret?)

I put some part of my reputation on the line - I state that I think that your Dagger, and Deutscher's piece, and seemingly the Ernst Kraft piece, are likely to be authentic.

How about a word from my two erstwhile colleagues Dave Hohaus and Houston Coates - who have declared their interest in Denny's dagger.

Joking repartee apart fellows - are you seeking to buy a quality original dagger with faked up engraving? Or do you suspect that the piece might be completely real?

C'mon now - you can tell Uncle Frederick.

FINAL NOTE - Upload of my photo failed. I will re-submit the image through another medium.

Fred,
E-mail me your photo montage, and I will post it for you.

Fred, try looking past the engraving on these dagger, just pretend it's not there if you must. Look at Deutcher's dagger, the grip is not a Kober grip, it's another makers. There are little clues on these dagger that would make an experienced SA type collector shy away from all of these dagger if they weren't engraved.

Hi Uncle Fred. Denny and I have completed the sale and he has promised I will be getting the dagger soon. I have to thank him for letting me have it. When I do receive it I will furnish multiple photos for study. I really don't have any idea if these daggers are good or not but they are not like the fakes owned by old Dutch in the 50's.

I do like the quality of the work on it and IMO it is worth the price I paid if for nothing more than a conversation piece. It will always be good for that-no matter where you take it. As I said in an earlier post-I think it will always be a matter of opinion if it has been post war altered unless someone finds an old ad from the engraver with a photo of what he could furnish or a photo of one in wear. At least I know what I am getting-and we sure don't always know that. I don't really think Dave was interested as the dagger is the wrong color for him.

On another note-how is your new Repro-Reco book coming along? Got an approx release date? Anything special you need for it?

Jon,

Please prove to me that the grip on Deutscher's dagger is not a Kober grip - because I do believe Deutscher's account of his dagger and how he acquired it, and therefore I have some challenge to your claim that it is not correct.

As for my photo montage, yes I will also send it to you. I believe and trust you to openly present it. I can't get it presently through the GDC e-mail site, so expect it through your outside e-mail communications.

FJS

Posting for Frederick

Gentlemen,

Firstly my thanks to Jon for getting my photo montage up on view. The imagery itself doesn't really prove anything, but it does make for some interesting observations:

The top item is the "Kurpfalz" dagger that Joe Linge presented. It is beautifully engraved, but it has a styling that appears to set it apart from the other pieces. Note the large size rhomboid diamond shapes engraved on the guard - they are not as neat, or precise as the equalateral diamond shapes shown on the other pieces - now they do all look as if they are from the same hand in terms of quality of workmanship.

Another interesting feature, if you look closely: The side facing of the tang nut on the TMJ Ernst Kraft dagger; and also on Denny Roach's dagger, are both decorated with a repeating ring design. So I really do think that these two pieces are from the same stable.

This feature does not appear on Deutscher's piece, or the Telschouw piece mentioned previously. However, my argument for these pieces is based on the presumption that the original engraver offered a range of design combinations and options - and that what we are looking at is different designs by the same hand.

The "Kurpfalz" piece I believe is a modern engraving. That the engraving is not up to the standard of these other pieces is a side issue. I am sure that there are other, authentic period engraved pieces which are not as fine as these other pieces. However, it was the use of the word "Kurpfalz" which makes me personally feel that it is inappropriate - and therefore (in my view) questionable.

It is now New Year's Eve. So I wish all GDC members, and readers of this correspondence (it has raised over 2000 hits!) very Best Wishes for the coming year of 2006 - and many more exciting daggers to contemplate.

FJS

Jon , you can believe , the Knoblauch-grip is a kober , may be a typical "Suhler" , grip.

Fred--one correction--the Kraft dagger has the same reverse as Joe's dagger. This is clearly shown in TJ's volume 1--page 206. IMO this just tends to make everthing clearly unclear--just as it was before.

Hi Houston,

Thanks for your response. But one small question here - are we singing from the same hymnbook?

I attach a photo montage (and this time it has worked - so it is on line - I don't normally have good luck in presenting these images) and this shows the reverse of the Kraft Dagger (from Johnson page 206); and aalsss0 the reverse of the Joe Linge dagger(as featured on this site.........
.....And guess what........they are different ! I do not think that the Joe Linge piece looks anything like the Kraft piece in the reverse feature details. (IMO)

OK Houston, what is your case now?

FJS

PS: Jon Shallcross - I request that you post an image for me. Thank you.

Houston, when the deal was already done on a forum thread and not privat via email or over the sale section then I realy hope you tell your obversations about this new bought dagger over this forum thread.

Fred,
Feel free to e-mail me any pictures you need posted.

Robert--I'll be glad to share anything I observe--but I really don't expect to see anything that would be conclusive about the authenticity of the engraving. The photos show it is good quality--I really think that is all we will ever know for sure. Even if the quality was not that great I don't think that would be conclusive either. Its just opinion--and most will always have doubts. I know that-and I bought it just for what it is-whatever that is

Posting for Fred

I agree Fred-not the same-no two are exactly alike. Not good photos but Joe's does seem to be of a lesser quality.

Here is one I had almost purchased from a major dealer but i was a minute late,

I don't know who owns this piece but it does differ from the others shown, such beautiful workmanship

My thanks to Jon Shallcross for posting the images I was unable to upload.

OK, fast observation here. The "Kurpfalz" dagger is, in my opinion, clearly messed about with - but I am basing this assumption primarily on the inappropriate use of (IMO) the name "Kurpfalz" - plus the other features I have previously highlighted.

The style of the engraving on the reverse of the Ernst Pack dagger is interesting, insofar that it is quite different to the reverse side engraving on both Denny Roach's piece and the piece revealed by Deutscher. Denny's dagger, and Deutscher's piece, seem to have very similar engraving on the reverse.

Deutscher's dagger, and the Ernst Pack piece - although differing in the engraving - also share an unexpected feature, they both have SA Gruppe stamps.

It is this feature of the SA Gruppe stamp that makes me think that these pieces were privately enhanced, and probably done by a professional gunsmith/engraver (he might well have been a member of the SA, and swanking around with his own refined SA dagger!). Or it might have been a commercial enterprise - an engraver advertising his services, to enhance daggers by the personalisation of the dagger with the artistic addition of the owner's name.

Can you tell the difference if something has been engraved 70 years ago, or just 40 years ago? No, not really. Engraving is engraving, and there are classically trained engravers still around who can do the job. And our extra problem is that some of these "tarted-up" pieces have been around for years. They themselves are now also "old".

It is my personal opinion that the "Kurpfalz" piece gave itself away by the use of the name; whereas the other pieces we have been looking at do not seem to show any flaw.

As my personal reputation has been built up by my enthusiasm and expose of suspected fakes and reproductions, I am obliged to "place my cards on the table", so to speak, and state that I cannot find any fault with Denny's Dagger, or Deutscher's, or the Ernst Pack piece. I admit it - I think those daggers and their engraved features are completely real.

FJS

Roy--Neat! Great TM-Anyone else got one? Whose questionable piece is the best questionable piece? So far I like the "Kraft" one the best.

Other than some etching similarities, there is one most common denominator in all of these daggers................. they are all Mint ++++ condition. Where are the dogs ?

I realy would take for for this dagger style. I know original ones are out but I also wonder why some (what is a lot for me) of this dagger style & named showed up in germany 2005. A friend of mine told me he could buy 3 of this SA daggers last year, with names like from the Gauleiter from Franken etc. I know also gun engravers in germany who easy could do such an engraving job. Last year I saw one EM SS dagger there was a skull engraved (nicely done) on the pommel screw.

I have a big time question marks behind such things, when there is no real proof behind such an engraved dagger.

I have a difficult time believing that all have been post war embelished. There are a couple that I really like with all of the age intact and complete.

Houston: When you get your dagger from Denny, I am sure that you are going to like it much more than the Ernst Kraft piece.

JR (in Fort Collins): Not all of these pieces are mint. In fact the one that Deutscher acquired shows the evidence of having had a rough life. I will ask Deutscher to submit a photograph that he has sent to me, in order that you may see this aspect.

Roy Caroll: Can you give us other photos of the dagger you illustrate, details of the name on it etc; which dealer was offering it, and any other salient information in order that we may observe and comment upon it - the cream of the intellect of the German Dagger Community is focussing on this right now.

Are there gun engravers in the States, and Europe, who can perform work to these levels of quality and exactitude. Yes most certainly there are (but they would also have to understand the cultural nuances and artistic styles of the period, in order to produce a convincing item).

Not only that, there is the matter of cost. If you wanted someone to design and execute engraving such as this well, I don't think you are going to get much change out of a $1000. (Tony - the engraver, we had some correspondence. Do you want to come in with your comment on this?)

FJS

F.J.S. DOESNT TOM WITTMANNS OPINION COUNT FOR ANYTHING? HE HAND INSPECTED THE (KURPFALZ)DAGGER AND SAID THE ENGRAVING WAS OF THE OLD GERMATIC STYLE SIMILAR TO THE LUFT PIECES AND BELIEVES IT TO BE PERIOD.

Joe,

Yes, of course Tom Wittmann's opinion counts. I have known Tom for many years, and have always considered him fair-minded, honest, and with his own distinct knowledge.

That I might not agree with something Tom has stated, does not mean to say that I think Tom's opinion should be disregarded. On the contrary, I think that the more learned opinion you can find, then the better your chances of finding the truth.

The problem that we have with this subject, is that it is not necessarily "black and white"; or "open and shut". The waters that flow through the collecting of Third Reich Blades can be very murky indeed. Tom expressed his opinion that the engraving on your dagger was in the "Old Germanic Style", and that he believes in it. I believe that he does believe in it.

I agree with him - it is rather in the Old Germanic Style, but I don't believe that the engraving was made at that time. And the reason I dispute it is because of what is, in my opinion, the improbable use of the word "Kurpfalz". It is my belief that the engraver (or the individual commissioning the engraving) has made a mistake - and that mistake suggests to me that the piece has been tampered with.

Tom Wittmann and I will certainly not fall out over this difference of opinion. And I am sure that the other contributors who don't agree with my account for the dagger will still say that here is an argument that "makes you think about it".

Having the GDC forum to examine issues such as this - even where we disagree - is one of the healthiest aspects of this hobby. In fact I would think that a lot of collectors would say that it is stimulating to engage in the "thrust and parry" of debate. You need more than one source of information of opinion, so you can weigh the "facts" to and fro and form your own judgement.

I hope the above response answers your question.

Best regards
FJS

NSKK Motorsportsschule Kurpfalz-Saar


Ulf.

FJS. IF KURPFALZ WAS A NSKK MOTORSPORT SCHOOL AND IF ALL THE STUDENTS WHO WERE GRADUATEING CHIPPED IN TO PRESENT THEIR SCHOOL MASTER A DAGGER,WOULDNT IT MAKE SENSE TO ENGRAVE THE NAME OF THE SCHOOL ON IT? JOE

FJS,
If you let me know of a "Show" you will visit in UK,I will bring "one"
I have with leather covered scabbard iin the "correct" manner.
Engraved crossguards in the style Witty likes,silvered fittings
personalised reverse upper fitting from Gau Essen!!!
We have met before in front of Harveys tables!!!
No its not one of his.Came out of a Bier Stube in Chicago!!
contact me by e-mail
Seiler (yank in UK)

How come this thread is dead. Where is the dagger that sold to Houston ?

Yes,lets see/hear some more pls!
Seiler (yank in Uk)

The dagger only arrived two days ago.The engraving is really beautiful and top notch.IMO is is hard to believe that a faker would spend so such time, trouble or expense. I really don't see how it could be any better.It is far superior and much more intricate than other pattern engraved examples I have seen in photos or in person over the years.

From the photos we have I agree with Fred that the crossguards were engraved by the same hand as the Kraft dagger shown in TJ's book,the Knoblauch dagger owned by Deutscher and probably the one sold by HH as mentioned earlier. While all are a bit different all have distinctive similiar patterns. Of special note are the circles on the surface of the swastikas-VERY exact and tiny work here-all the above pieces have this aspect. It would be wonderful to compare these pieces in hand but I doubt that will ever happen. If you can accept that these were all engraved by the same hand and can accept Deutscher's account of how he obtained his example than the logical preliminary conclusion would be that the engraving is period on all of the above mentioned pieces.

I believe Deutscher!-and that is the real basis of my personal opinion-- so my conclusion-without being able to actually see the other daggers and based on the photos and Deutscher's account-is that the engraving is period. Many won't agree-so-what else is new?

I have a bit of difficulty getting great detailed closeup photos and am not sure if I can get any better ones than those already shown-but will try if someone has some aspect they want to see. The dagger will be available for all to see at the SOS and MAX. I'm sure you will find that it is both beautiful and interesting if nothing else. I hope someone will just walk up and produce one of the other daggers for comparison

Hello Joe Linge, Seiler, Houston, Jon, etc.

I am sorry for not having responded directly to the recent questions, but I had a serious domestic problem just after Christmas, which means that I am now living elsewhere in the country, without my archive, no computer or Internet connection, and trying to find a place to settle. I have access to a computer on which I can prepare e-mail messages on floppy disks, and then I can take it to the local library where there is a free Internet service (when you can get on to it), which is where I am now. So please bear with me and I will respond.

To reply immediately to Joe and the question of the NSKK "Kurpfalz-Saar" School - YES, it is quite possible that a group of students, or teachers, could subscribe to having a dagger acquired, decorated, and presented to the Head of the School (or indeed to any other distinguished individual). The only flaw I find with this in respect to the dagger you originally presented, is that the word "Kurpfalz" is a meaningless application of the name. If it had stated "NSKK Motorsportschule Kurpfalz-Saar" it would have been more impressive - but still questionable in my opinion. The reason? Well, the engraving would normally have a purpose - to denote ownership; acknowledge an event; achievement; commemoration; retirement; or whatever?

The use of the place name doesn't really explain anything at all, and that is why I find it questionable.

I appreciate that you might find me pedantic in this, but it is my genuine opinion.

I have to vacate my use of this facility right now, but will try and get a further reply to the rest of you later.

Best regards
FJS

Fred-So sorry about the problems you are having. I think all of our GDC members as well as all the members of the German edged weapon collecting community value your opinions very highly and look forward to your continued participation on our forums. We also look forward with anticipation to the new edition of your book on reproductions.

In your own time Fred.Take care.
Seiler.(Yank inUK)

NSKK Motorsportschule Kurpfalz-Saar

Dear Joe (and the other guys locking in with me on this),

Further to my previous answer to Joe’s question about the possibility of Students/Teachers et al contributing to procure an ornate dagger as a gift to a Master Teacher; I am sure that we all agree that this could have possibly happened. The question is: Is the dagger that Joe was in possession of such an example? If it isn’t such a piece, then what is it, and how do we prove it?

I have done some further research on the dagger (based solely on the information as presented in this thread, and not with any first-hand examination of the dagger). However, I do think that there are some salient observations which can be made:

1) Let’s work from the position that it is an NSKK Dagger: I looked NSKK Kurpfalz up in a copy of "Anschriften der Dienstellen der NSDAP" - I have the 1937 edition - and what it shows is this:
There was NO NSKK Motor-Obergruppen of this name;
There was NO NSKK Motor-Gruppen of this name.

2) What there was, however, was an NSKK Brigade "Kurpfalz-Saar" . This Brigade was headed by NSKK Brigadeführer R. Rees, and was headquartered at Kaiserslautern i. Pf., Dr Martin Lutherstrasse 18.

3) So already we have established that the correct name of the NSKK Brigade is "Kurpfalz-Saar" - and coincidently it is this same name which appears on the Postcard image which was published previously in this thread.

4) First option. As the piece which Joe featured does not feature this correct version of the NSKK Brigade name, it leaves open the possibility that the piece may be a basic NSKK dagger that has been tampered with by the addition of engraving - and an incorrect engraving at that.

5) The second option, of course, is that it may not be an NSKK dagger at all - perhaps it is an SA Dagger to which has been added an NSKK scabbard? One point for certain, the dagger has been tampered with in one area or another. So let’s consider the second option - that it is an SA Dagger, and that the black NSKK scabbard is just an unfortunate addition. The piece had no scabbard, so someone added one - it just happened to be black, well that does happen, quite innocently, from time to time. So what about an SA "Kurpfalz" dagger?

6) Yes, this too existed - I looked it up in the NSDAP book which I quoted above - and it shows that there existed an SA Gruppe "Kurpfalz", and it was headed by SA Gruppenfuhrer Max Luyken. Office address: Mannheim, Otto Beckstrasse 27.

7) OK, this brings us back to the circumstance of the dagger - let us assume that it is an SA Dagger, and the claim is that it is from the SA Gruppe "Kurpfalz". Well it doesn’t seem to show any SA Gruppe marking associated with Kurpfalz (but then that didn’t always occur). So we have to base our opinion on whether the actual inscription is logical.

8) The only flaw I find with this, in respect to the dagger presented, is that the word "Kurpfalz" (as I have previously stated) is a meaningless application of the name. That was always my argument - the name by itself does not make sense. If the name did not appear and only the decoration existed, then that is another conundrum - we would be debating whether or not the engraving/etching was truly correct for the period, or of sufficient expert quality. As it stands, however, the name becomes a problem - because as we now know, it can’t be an NSKK unit - so it has to be an SA Gruppe name.

The bottom line is this, if this is an SA Group name, what is the purpose of putting it on the dagger? It doesn’t tell us who the owner is, or his membership number, or why this dagger existed (award?, gift?, prize?) or any other quantifiable explanation for its existence with this decoration.

It is in my view highly suspicious. I think it has been tampered with in post-war years for the purpose of attracting a higher price from collectors, by featuring an appealing (albeit flawed, in my view) decoration to the crossguards.

This is my honest opinion.

Yours truly
FJS

How can a dagger posted as an SA dagger become an NSKK one ,or have I missed something in the thread.For some reason I cannot see the photos of the original dagger that was posted.Regards nats


http://www.stan-the-man.tk

FJS. YOU ARE AMAZING,YOU HAVE FINALLY CONVINCED ME OF YOUR CONCLUSION,WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT SELLER OF THE DAGGER STATES THAT IT WAS VET. AQUIRED IN 1945. JOE

Dear Joe,

Thank you for your kind compliments - it is gratifying to receive such a gentlemanly response to what has been such a vigorously debated subject. It also appears that the tussle, back and forth with this thread, caught the attention of the GDC community - we certainly seem to have received a better than average number of "hits".

At the end of the day, I have to state, I found the whole exercise exhilarating. It was a challenge of minds, and an exercise in knowledge and understanding in which everyone (bar none) was able to make a valid point and a comment worthy of debating.

You made one final point about the dagger - and that is that it was "Vet acquired in 1945". Can there be any truth in this? Well, I suppose that the piece could have been Vet acquired then - after all, it is basically a genuine dagger. However, does that mean it had that engraving on the crossguards at that time? That was one of the issues I questioned, I didn’t think that the engraving was from the period, and the erroneous use of the "Kurpfalz" name seemed to confirm that suspicion. And of course there is the other issue of the subsequent owners since WWII.

The trader you obtained the piece from was probably stating his honest belief that the dagger was "Vet acquired" - because the man he obtained it from told him so. Was this man the actual Vet? Or was he a subsequent owner?

I am not about to accuse any of the former owners of dishonesty in their description of the piece and its provenance. It is clear, however, that somewhere - back up the line - someone has uttered an untruth about the item, and that this untruth has stayed with the dagger as some form of alleged reputation. At the end of the day, it is the merits of the dagger that determine authenticity, and that the story surrounding it - well, it is just a story. You buy the dagger, not the story.

Good luck with your collecting, Joe. Your willingness in sharing the "Kurpfalz" dagger with the GDC community means that many people will have gained additional knowledge from your having - so to speak - put all your cards upon the table. This community thrives by sharing - and you have shared with generosity. Thank you.

Frederick J. Stephens

I,m resurrecting this one again if I may.
I have been following this intruiging subject since the start.
Although unable to post pics.
I have an unusual one I came across and bought about 10 yrs ago.
Maker marked Kuhrt, Gau No.
Crossguards,Oakleaf /acorn hand engraved with thin line background engraving which highlights the oakleaves.Fine line outline to the upper and lower surface of the crossguards.
Upper/lower scabbard fittings lined like an Honor Dagger but very fine line and not so deep.Reverse of upper fitting engraved in the Typical double lined German fashion
" SA Sturmfuhrer
R.Mann
SA Gau Essen"
Scabbard covered in fine Morocco brown leather in the proper fashion,cut around the fittings (not under)
two pieces butted down the edge of the scabbard.
All metal heavily silver plated.
Standard blade deep black motto.No graining an never had.
Standard hanger long snout.The whole has lovely always been together look and undamaged just age.
In any event as I am living in UK at this time,I arranged a meet with Fred yesterday at a UK Show.He gave it the "Business",
I was stunned when he said,ITS GOOD. I always had a good feel for it and he made my day.Thanks Fred.I hope he has the chance to see the Others.
Sorry to go on But.....
Cheers
Seiler (Yank in UK)