Hi Gents,

I bought this dagger about seven years ago from a dealer in the UK. Shortly afterwards I developed some serious concerns about it and sent it back to him. My concerns with the dealer were based on the hit and miss nature of his items. One NSFK dagger he sent to me to view was an obvious fake, so either he didn't know what he was doing... or he intended to deceive. Either way, I couldn't stand the doubts hanging over this SS dagger so I got rid of it. I could have been put off the hobby for good at that point, as so many 'reputable' British dealers were selling fakes or parts daggers. Happily I persisted and learned enough to determine for myself what was good or bad.... most of the time!

My concerns with this particular SS Dagger stemmed from a few observations:

1. The scabbard was in poor condition, no anodised finish remaining, battered screws and dented ball. The scabbard ring had been re-soldered at some point. Surely it would take quite some force to smash off the scabbard ring fitting. All that wear and tear, and yet a mint blade! The blade graded Ex ++ to Full Mint. How could this be?
2. I didn't like the rune button. The inner and outer circle almost came together at about 5 O'clock.
3. The tang didn't look quite right to me, and when I took the grip off, a strange black substance was on my hands, not dirt or grease, and I began to wonder if it was some kind of dye to make the metal look seventy years old.
4. On the grip, the texture of the wood seemed a bit rough to me. This wasn't obvious at first, but I think it shows in the photos. There were some regular dents to the wooden grip, that looked like the grip had knocked against something over and over. Was this added to fool people into thinking it had been worn?

As I am sure every collector knows, when one develops doubts then the piece is no longer a joy to own, but a constant cross to bear, and so I dumped it. I could have been wrong to do so...who knows.

Perhaps if these photographs I took are good enough, someone on this forum will have an opinion on whether this was a good dagger, parts dagger or a good fake.

Regards to all.

And more...

Last ones ...

I forgot to mention it, but underneath the Eagle's right wing, (viewers left), there is a small gap. I didn't think these early quality pieces had poorly fitting grip Eagles. It was more obvious in the hand than you can see from the photograph.

The bumps on the back of the grip are commonly seen, as apparently hammers were in short supply when nailing up signs. The huge square hole on the bottom of the grip was done to make this grip fit this tang and cross guard set. The upper scabbard fitting throat does not fit well, so overall, a parts dagger.

What parts do you think are original and what parts are post war reproductions?

Any views on the rune button? It was something that really didn't look right, the lines of the two circles wider apart at some points and then almost touching at the lower right corner. I can't see how such a poor button would have passed approval in the IIIR period.

I think the parts are original, the button looks ok, but a close up would be better. The metal and enamel of the button can be worn smoothly down, and may be uneven from wear. I usually like to see the brass nipple on the inside of the grip, should be smashed down toward the eagle.

All original? I can't believe that! Where does one obtain an almost mint conditioned SS blade by Gottlieb? I am certain this blade is a good quality fake.

As you know, it's VERY difficult to judge authenticity from pictures, especially without close ups. I agree, the tang looks suspect, however the logo looks acid etched, not smooth like laser etched examples. The cross graining is decent enough. let's see if anyone else jump in with opinions, or maybe the guy will bring it to the MAX show for an in hand inspection. I'm not claiming to be the be all, end all expert on judging this dagger. It must not be too bad, as you bought it at some point.

Im not comfortable with that tang clearance hole on the bottom of the grip being that large to accommodate a thin tang. The grip may have been reworked or its junk. The Blade I also agree with Arminius..just doesnt seem to match the condition of the rest of the dagger and scabbard...with not one blemish..or a glint of a runner mark after 80 yrs on the blade. The blade also in the photos appears to be shorter...or is it the angle of the photo giving it that effect?
I see some other stuff in the motto that strikes me odd..with the serifs on the letter "H" in " Ehre and heisst "

Scabbard throat has been messed with also.

I do agree with John above that in in hand inspection would most likely nail the coffin shut in. Anyone can buy anything without knowledge..thats a given in this hobby and many other of lifes amenities. These days of modern times and technology,,falling in love at first sight..can be a #1 mistake in a marriage between the collector and artifact. We have all been there and done that at some point.

Unless this is a Monday Morning job in the factory..the photos provided show it as such..and not,,. what is commonly seen in many details of a Hammesfahr SS dagger.
A peek up the "Bung Hole " of the grip bottom may explain alot at least about the grip..and the eagle pins beneath. I would love to see the inner condition of the grip..as they have a certain look about them only the type collector knows about.

And if Im wrong about my observations..then I invite to be proven wrong..as we are all here to learn. I dont mind it at all. Regards Larry

Thank you John and Larry for your insight.

I bought this over the phone years ago, and returned it when I developed doubts, so apart from these photos have no way to check the interior of the grip or the blade again.

I suppose what has always stuck in my mind is the minty blade, which had problems but was very good, if it was a repro. I collect SS daggers and to be honest it has made me especially weary of Gottlieb SS daggers. That is why I am trying to pin point what was wrong with this blade. I should have kept it for a reference, but could afford to throw away a couple of grand on a sample.

Thanks again and best regards.

Yes, I've seen quite a few repro blades, but if this is one, wow, it's nice. I'd like to see the tang closer, and the etching. I have a couple dozen early SS daggers, but I really like NPEA daggers, and some of the repro blades are terrible.

Take a look at the top of the SS dagger forum. There are a couple of "Anatomy of a Fake" topics that I did that I have pinned there. One has a grip like yours with rough or 'open pores' finish.

Like John, I think the blade looks good. Too good really - not a blemish.

Anyway, you did the right thing when you returned it.