OK Chaps, you have been "Holler"-ing for this response, so now you have got it. Idirect this to Rob NL, and also to Craig - as you will note from the end of this submission,
Thank you for posting all the images of the documentation concerning the Wolf Sword. I am grateful to you for making so much of the material available, and I will enjoy reading it and laughing through it.
With regard to all this, I do agree with you that if I make demeaning statements about the Adolf Wolf Sword, then you are quite right that I should explain my opinions more fully and openly. After all, it is an expensive sword in someone's collection - your collection in this case - so you are entitled to an explanation from me for having spoken critically of the piece.
However, before I make my explanation, let me state that your ownership of the sword was unknown to me until I read your reply on the thread yesterday. It was Craig who sent photos of the sword to me - requesting my comment about it. And following my pointing out of some features that I found questionable, it was also Craig who insisted that I was "100% wrong" because he had the correspondence from Wolf to Bayliss, that �proves� that the whole piece is authentic.
Well, having re-read the correspondence (again) I have to say that I do not agree. There are features in the Wolf correspondence that do not sound true. For example in page 1 (I refer here to the translation that you (Rob NL) have provided) Wolf states: �The procuring of a Luftwaffe pennant - at least, I presume this is what you mean by the word �standard� � - this comment is a joke, Wolf is playing a game here with Mr. Bayliss. He is pretending that he doesn�t know what a �standard� is (yet the word �Standarte� must be known to him.) Instead he pretends that �standard� must equate to a �wimpel� - the German word for a small flag or pennant. Elsewhere he is emphatic in the correspondence that �no photos were taken� and that the whole ceremony was �unofficial� - all very convenient to cloud the issue of Wolf�s recall or his understanding of the questions being asked by Mr. Bayliss. I do not propose to follow this theme, because it diverts us from the main issue. Suffice to say that I do not trust Wolf�s replies in the correspondence, and I will concentrate my efforts towards the inscription on the blade.
I have identified a lot of features on this sword etching which I find to be questionable, and indeed completely at fault. However, as I cannot be bothered to fend off the mind-numbing atavistic rejections that my information attracts from one particular quarter - I will reduce my critique of this item down to one single line. It is the last line on the sword etching, the one which states: NSDAP. Mannheim 20. April 1942.
The man who prepared this inscription had a job which is known as a �Lettering Artist�. He may not necessarily be the same person who etches the blade, as that also is a specialist skill. The Lettering Artist forms the inscription in an acid-resistant wax paint - and he does this in reverse form (i.e. �wrong reading� or mirror image) on a special carrier paper. When this is done, the image and paper is transferred to the blade to be etched - this time the wax paint image is face down on the blade (now �right reading�) and it is bonded to the blade. Some other masking may be done to the blade to protect other areas from the acid, but basically the blade inscription as defined above is ready to be etched.
However, the Lettering Artist has made some notable failings with this line. For example: Point 1) The whole line is off-centre to the rest of the inscription. It is not much, only about 5mm, but it is enough to be seen and any professional artist would have corrected that. Point 2 - and also Point 3) The wording and punctuation seem to be at some odds. NSDAP is followed by a full point (period mark (.) - US) then by the word Mannheim. A much greater space follows this - and then appears the date 20. April 1942. It becomes impossible to tell if this means that the award is from the NSDAP at Mannheim ? OR, Is it from the NSDAP. (given at.....) Mannheim, 20. April 1942? The legend becomes incomprehensible.
These features - the notably off-set line, and the clumsy spacing and punctuation are in my opinion evidence of extremely poor workmanship (by the Lettering Artist) and are indicative of a non-professional approach to the job. Craig is going to dispute this - he is going to say that mistakes and flaws are common on German Daggers (that they are virtually �normal�). In fact he will come out with his fatuous argument about the Bahnschutz crossguard with its famous �flaw�; or his claim that the Blood Order has a similar �flaw�. None of these arguments are proven (in my opinion), but we have to put up with it. Well, there is another feature here, and I have saved it to the last, because I would like Craig to address this specifically:-
Point 4) Take a look at the first word in the line: �NSDAP� - those five letters are presented in a solid Roman Font complete with serifs. And this is very curious because it is also a very post-war style. You see the usage of the Black Letter, or similar Fraktur styles does not encourage the expression of words in an all capital form. The reason being that it is almost illegible to read, the Black Letter does not lend itself to the complete capitalisation of long (or even short) words, and so the post-war western European practice was to substitute these Capital words with a non-Black Letter type face - a �Roman� form type face.
However, this artistic practice was not the norm for the Germans. They quite happily utilised all capitals in Black Letter with some of their words (NSDAP, NSKK, NSBO, etc. etc.). because the Black Letter was a very common alphabet to them - they had no problem in reading it.
So the construction of the Adolf Wolf inscription reveals a very telling point - the Lettering Artist seems to have been schooled in the post-war concept of not using all Black Letter capitals - so he used a Roman serifed font instead. Therefore by doing it �right� he actually got it wrong for the time period concerned. Check the pre-war German references. You will see complete capital words in Black Letter everywhere - then look back at this inscription, it has all the attributes of a post-war construction. The Lettering Artist did not know that he should have used the Fraktur or Black Letter throughout the inscription - and therefore made his intellectual mistake.
So Craig, as it was you who originally started this thread, and subsequently determined to draw me into it, I ask you now to complete your response with a very specific clarification. If you disagree with my explanation about the use of the Fraktur, Black Letter, and Roman typefaces above, then I think that you should present an explanation as to why you state it is wrong. Not one of your wooly-headed responses stating that you just don�t believe it or that I am 100% wrong, or any of the other get-out lines that you habitually present. Let�s have some hard facts. Let us see you quantify your dismissal of my account with hard, measurable facts which can be checked. Let us see if you can present the same exacting disciplines to your answer as you demand from my explanations.
Because if you cannot do the above, then I suggest that you graciously concede the case, and acknowledge that I was right all along - Quod erat demonstrandum!
