There has at times been an unpleasant undercurrent since almost the beginning of the thread which is truly unfortunate. Depending on the time frame it has not necessarily been one sided. In collecting credibility is essential whether you are dealer, collector, or just a participant in a discussion. In fact some say that credibility is everything. I know that I don�t react particularly well if my credibility or sincerity is called into question. And would expect similar reactions from others. But I also think that it�s important to try and be at least halfway civil, so that the focus is on the object being discussed, not on personal differences.
The purpose of the thread ostensibly was to evaluate a sword. It was stated that the sword was an Eickhorn and I think somewhere else it was stated that the etching style was in the manner of an Eickhorn. I never saw a trademark on the blade. It either has a trademark or it does not. And does that match the documentation?
As far as I know the dagger was never attributed to any maker. If there was a maker mark in the image it was not legible. Does it even have one? I don�t know. There was also I think an earlier question asking if the dagger was the one that Craig purchased at the MAX. I don�t know if it is the same dagger or not. (I could be be in error and if so I hope that someone corrects me.) I also have a recollection of a thread about a dispute at the MAX involving a prospective buyer and a dagger. Are they one and the same? It was not a recent discussion, but perhaps the affected individual could be contacted to see if it�s the same dagger. And ask him if it had a maker�s mark and what it was? FP
