The H�hnlein dagger center mounts are an �interesting� piece of work. We know that in general the makers of these specifically marked daggers had on the plus side:
* Access to acid etching materials. * Access to mechanical engravers. * Access to silver in either bullion or coin form. * An ability to melt and cast metal. * Access to the types of alloys that used to be used to manufacture general use items like metal (food) serving platters etc. (A more difficult piece of the puzzle, with multiple choices of alloys.)
And on the minus side. They lacked the right tools for the job ie:
* No one piece �800� stamp. * No legitimate �Gahr� stamp. * No proper bending fixture. * No ability to electroplate metals. * A poorly executed amateurish ability to cast silver (silver is more difficult than with some other common metals). * A somewhat indifferent skill set with the engraving process.
The pictures of the center mount shows what seems to be a machined(?) internal border area with a thin wall casting. (Although to be fair, that is not a complete certainly without a closer look.) As was mentioned it�s a little on the crude side having a different surface finish. Silver plating apparently either being too expensive or not available for the center mount maker(s). Also (even excluding the presumed recovered scabbards), having more noticeable gaps with some specimens than others. With the black patination seen with some examples, being either as first manufactured. Or done yesterday.
With the addition of the somewhat bizarre (IMO) two toned finish of the scabbard mounts. Which of course would be somewhat less noticeable if the actual silver parts were polished every day (or as needed). But even then still does not match up exactly.
PS: I don�t know what the problem is with the Offermann photo. But it would be nice to see some followup, inasmuch as it has been touted as a major item to be used to prove a point. After all it�s a period photo, not a dagger. Right? FP
