I thought it proper to note that a new SS dagger reference book was just published and while short, it focuses on SS prototype daggers and includes pictures of these pieces, which have never before been published. If this post is inappropriate promotion I apologize and please remove!


Here is the link: https://www.ermilitaria.com/product-page/the-first-of-the-best-early-and-prototype-ss-daggers

Really some great information!

WK

Great to see a new book. Post a picture or two WK. Mention the price if you want.

We solicit and encourage announcements of new hobby reference material. You may post a sales message here without having a premium membership.

Dave

Thanks Dave, the ERM team appreciates your support. This first look into these pieces is only $16 for domestic orders and $20 for international orders. I hope to see you order one Dave! These were printed in short run and about 80% have already been sold. Here some photos used in the publication. The period photo shows an SS Gruppenfuhrer wearing one of these daggers. The second photo shows two of these pieces featured in the book!

I don't believe in these: they came around since just a few years ago... and they are much too different from the handful original known SA Christmas daggers... not even close!

How many of these "have been found" already by now?

Best regards,

Herman

Thanks for your opinion Herman, the period photos establish these existed.

Luckely there are period pictures that prove their existanse.
Or are all these pictures reworked and photoshopped?

Let's see the pictures

I believe the one is posted above--the remainder are in the book

There are four SS Prototypes known (3/4 of which appeared decades ago). Thanks.

Just post the pictures.. People on the forum and other websites steal my photos and call it ( the old fair use excuse) Many in Russia and other European forums

The Team has to get there story straight.

Tom Wittmann has wrote that these all have surfaced in the last 2 years..



{{{The first Prototype SS example was brought to my attention a couple of years ago by a veteran family member who had an example, (he didn't know what is was at the time) and was good enough to send me photographs. It was an astounding discovery and one of the most important edged weapons to surface to the collecting community in many years. I had the pleasure of conversing extensively with the individual that owned it, and in fact gave him an idea of its worth after he sent me some photographs. The owner, once he realized the value, (like people seem to do), did contact various members in our collecting community, and was successful in selling the Prototype for slightly more than the figure I felt it was worth. It was a good deal for both people!

As things go in this hobby, new discoveries tend to cause the surfacing of other pieces that may have languished for years being unidentified in collections or family treasures. Now that three of these SS Prototypes have come to the attention of the collecting community, }} end quote....

While I'm friends with Tom (he was very much the gentlemen and bought me supper at the last SOS!! I do not agree with his opinion from pictures. But I'm sure that does not matter..
So it seems in the last 2 years 3-4 of these have just materialized and to sell them or to keep them sold (The Team) has to write what appears to be a scholarly pamphlet based on a few copied photos .
The pamphlet falls way short of period proof. 3rd 4th generation photos really?? Need at least the 1st generation photos for a starter . The Pamphlet does not even have all the early SS dagger makers listed..There are others known that are not on the internet .
As a faker TO THE STARS told me once (THE SHOW MUST GO ON) ......
I really enjoy the hobby but on the last 10 to 15 years it is all smoke and mirrors and greed..... And there needs to be a house cleaning..
This post is not directed to Tom Wittmann in any way.. He is a Great person and passionate collector.. It is directed only to these daggers that so badly need to be blessed by a team or village .. And it seems they also (self authenticate themselves). And that is a problem ..

http://www.wwiidaggers.com/BOOKS.htm

Tom just means these haven?t been published before and I don?t think have been posted online until recently. Again. These have been known to some for decades. ThAnks for your thoughts on the book.

@ Damast, what do you mean with 3th and 4th generation pictures?
They show the same daggers as the 1st generation pictures....
What does it matter if the used pictures come from the internet?
Don't we all look on the internet for pictures and evidence?
It would be a big coincidence that the pictures used and found on the internet, all were reworked with another grip eagle... especially when they all come from a different source.

I guess you're pointing out to 'reworked' pictures?
Can someone please post the same pictures where the daggers aren't 'reworked'?

No he does not say that at all.... It is plain English..

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyone can post pictures on the internet..... Anyone can copy pictures off the internet you must have the original pictures from the 1930s..
What I mean is the original period circa 1930s pictures are not taken from the 1st generation original photos..
The 1930s era photos are off the internet and other publications... So already these ( 1930s photos) have been copied at least a few times at best.. These are not original source
1930s pictures..
You do understand the original etch plates for the Rohm do still survive and are in fakers hands (for decades).
And it is also known that a (well known) dealer bought a etching plate with Rohm from a action house some time back..
How can you call this proof when your proof is (copied photos).. Follow the trail find the original photos... After that it is still a huge uphill battle as you need documentation of factories doing these with Rohm in Dec. Jan. The answers are out there along with other SS makers not listed.

Well, I can copy a picture for 100 times without the shape from an gripeagle suddenly changes its shape...

The daggers that were researched are/were in hands of longtime collectors and in veterans family property. Till now when they finaly are researched.
You also have NO prove that these were made by the post war bought etch plates!
Till now there was no one who could prove that they didn't existed.
If SA proto's did exist, then why wouldn't there have been SS proto's?
It's only logical and common sence.
And there's to much paranoia aswell!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you look on the internet for proof or research you are nuts, Crazy... What are the sources???? What is the posters agenda?? No academic paper can be written this way..
People who write references (booklets, pamphlets or the dagger world according to me) that find all information on the internet are condemned to fail.. And have!

And it is also known that a (well known) dealer bought a etching plate with Rohm from a action house some time back..

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Damast, is it also proven that this (well known) dealer actually made fake R?hm blades?
If he did so and sold these, he should belong in jail.

Is it the same fond as is seen on the inscription of these Christmas daggers?
How about the 'Meine Ehre Heisst Treue' text?
Was such plate also bought by the same dealer?

Please prove that... thx.

-



Well, I can copy a picture for 100 times without the shape from an gripeagle suddenly changes its shape...

The daggers that were researched are/were in hands of longtime collectors and in veterans family property. Till now when they finaly are researched.
You also have NO prove that these were made by the post war bought etch plates!
Till now there was no one who could prove that they didn't existed.
If SA proto's did exist, then why wouldn't there have been SS proto's?
It's only logical and common sence.
And there's to much paranoia aswell!
[/quote]
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
So you are on the team....
Who says there is no proof they were not made from original etching plates ???
Simple , does the team have the original 1930s photo...???? No....
You miss the point you have no control over the original photos.. What has been done (if anything) as the photos move father away from the original source..
yes, I can proof they did not exist. Any team member or serious collector is welcomed to come see what I have... And do not need copies of pictures that you the team never had control of the originals..
Your pamphlet or booklet would never be considered in the real academic world..
Forums are all about agendas..
Collectors always tell me Share your information here on the internet.. Why has the team keep it to themselves??. FOR DECADES
Why would all these well known dealers and large pocket book collectors NEVER mention these before ?? Share with the greater good etc... (JOKE) As you say they were known for decades... There are reasons and they are plain as day.. one is greed and the other is obvious.

As I said you are welcome to see for yourself... It would blow your mind..

Jail .. This is old news.. You have to pull your head out of the sand..
You do understand you have a team member with a history of reworking photos.. It is on the other forum..

JR is not involved with these books or the daggers whatsoever.....

I just can't but wonder how many of the posters have read the book?
I haven't yet myself and look forward to seeing it.

The comments of 'it's well known that' reminds me of an old wives tale mentality.
Lord, this hobby is full of them.

This is not the Bible, it's just something to be read and evaluated on it's own
merit for what it is or isn't. Maybe it's worthwhile - maybe not.

Texas
Well said.
Heck, no Honor Ring, no Christmass SS dagger, my future collection is getting smaller every day.
BUT HAY!! I'm getting richer.
Ed

I agree. Well said, Tex.

I ordered a copy and have had it for several days and have read it and looked it the pictures several times.

Captivating. A whole new series of early EP&S SS daggers ? It poses many questions which I hope will get discussed here.

One comment about the above discussion on the photos: Whether the photos in the publication are 1st, 3rd, or 5th generation matters not. Look at them and decide for yourself what they tell you about the daggers in question. The originals were taken 85 years or so ago. If you feel that a photo has been manipulated, then say what part of the photo has been altered. If possible, show us a "before" picture.

Dave

I have also had a copy of this publication a week or so now, and it is a great little book showing these 1.st pattern prototypes.
As Dave and Texasuberalles have said, the books info need to be discussed further.
Is there an agenda?
In my opinion it does look like an honest start at a discussion of prototype SS daggers which to my knowledge has not been published or "opened up" before.
Interesting.

A reference book at 16 US$... it is almost a give away!
Why?
Maybe it is an attempt to quickly and maximally spread the (bad) information that is in it?

Does it makes those newly discovered, super rare, never seen before 2015, SS Christmas daggers become the real thing? Not in a 100 years!


For my understanding:

"Wunderkind" = "The red baron" (member on WAF) = "ERM" (another member on WAF)

Are all 1 and the same person, right?

Best regards,

Herman

So what?

Can you please summ up here in this topic what he or ERM is doing wrong?
What is it where you are accusing ERM from?
Research? Booklets? Reworking pictures? Fakery? Fraud? Potential fraud?
Let me remind you to chose your words wisely because that are some very hard accuisations based on nothing else then speculations!

Let's hear it sir.

Thanks in advance

Still keeping up the dirty work for ERM, Krikke?

You named a few very serious offenses here... but this is not a courtroom, right?

Maybe it is high time for you to stop pretending "naive and innocent".

Believe me: this is going to stick to you... for a very long time!

Herman V

Herman, you are becoming very boring man!

Going to stick with me??? I don't think so.
There's nothing that I'm doing wrong.
You're just paranoid.

Enough of the name-calling !!

Herman and Krikke, you need to tone down the talk and leave out accusations.

Discuss the contents of the book. Post pictures of the artifacts.

Dave

Probably the first thing to agree upon is the definition of a prototype dagger .....

Anybody willing to try ?

To me the name 'prototype' is a bad choise. Prototypes from whatever objects are not realy in use in daily life. They're made as a testobject to discover positive and negative features of it and to see what could be improved.

These early Christmas daggers, SA's and SS's, were accepted and distributed to some high leaders.
Imo the naming (rare) 1st type M33 would be better choise.
Just like is the case with M36 daggers.

Prototype or proof model (probe in German).

Prototype is best. for me

Krikke, Tex,

Right.

Prototypes are built to test a design concept. They also serve as a learning experience for the factory engineers so that production can be as smooth and as cost efficient as possible.

Dave

I'd say prototype is a poor name here. I expect a prototype to be a pre-production model.

I would rather say "Trial Production" if a limited number is produced for verification by the customer before the mass-volume is produced.

On a side-line, it happens all the time in the Army/ AF in Norway, they want a new insignia or article, the producers come up with a design which is made in a limited production for verification by the various offices. Binned or accepted.


Looking with such eyes at these daggers with the special motto and eagle etc, maybe they were just the same, ie Production Samples for approval by the authorities, and someone just said -No, Try again.

Sorry, Trigger, but they are not trial production models at all.

They are not made on the machines or by the methods that will make production models.They are often made slightly differently to test the viability of different proposed features.

I say this because before I retired I worked a good part of my career in product development for Caterpillar Inc.

Dave

I think the best example of this Dave, is the copper scabbard body we see on Eickhorn SA prototypes! Clearly too soft and thus, replaced with steel for standard production. Trigger, I think what you describe is exactly right here ("It happens all the time in the Army/ AF in Norway, they want a new insignia or article, the producers come up with a design which is made in a limited production for verification by the various offices. Binned or accepted."). The photos showing these in wear were likely given to a few generals for this purpose and maybe as a sign of favor? We will likely never know who received them, although the photos all show Gruppenfuhrer I believe.

I hear both arguments, but I like prototype Type I (prototype motto) and Type II (standard motto).

NO... These are not prototypes by any stretch of the imagination.. (if period)
For those of us who are in the trade ( I own tool and die shop) A prototype is just that a concept piece... A mock up {BEFORE AND A STRESS BEFORE!! A LIMITED NUMBER ARE MADE FOR VERIFICATION}...
An original model on which something is patterned.. Many times a totally hand made or machined one off parts..,
The word prototype does not belong on these daggers what ever they are..
Who said the copper was to soft???? Just a uneducated opinion?? IT WAS TOO EXPENSIVE... from a manufacture point of view..

I have made many prototype parts at my business.. And as I said for those who UNDERSTAND THE PRODUCTION PROCESS PROTOTYPES ARE NOT 10 ,50,100, PARTS.
Now from there you may go to a short run of parts they are inspected and if they pass inspection (certs some time required) than you go into production..
If these daggers are period at the very BEST they are just a short (small run of PRODUCTION pieces..)

Collectors , dealers who call these prototypes should look the word up in a industrial trade dictionary.....
I hope this drives it home enough for the arm chair prototype experts..
THERE ARE A FEW DOCUMENTED REAL PROTOTYPE DAGGERS AND SWORDS OUT THERE BUT VERY RARE AND SOME PRONE TO BE FAKES.
THAN YOU HAVE THE DOCUMENTED ONE OFF PRESENTATION AND EXPOSITION PIECES.. THESE ARE ANOTHER CATEGORY THAT I COLLECT..
DAVE UNDERSTANDS BECAUSE HE WAS IN THE TRADE.. MANY LAYMEN DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE TERM PROTOTYPE AND BY SOME OF THE POSTS ITS SEEMS WISHFUL THINKING . THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND HERE.. IT IS BLACK AND WHITE.. NO ROOM FOR DEBATE.

Came n a little strong but basic stuff..

Here is the Merian Webster definition-

Definition of prototype
1 : an original model on which something is patterned : ARCHETYPE
2 : an individual that exhibits the essential features of a later type
3 : a standard or typical example
4 : a first full-scale and usually functional form of a new type or design of a construction

May I suggest that some of you start with reading this treat, it dates from the golden age of the forum.
Some very senior people in the hobby were participating in this discussion on SA Christmas dagger prototypes.

Best regards,

Herman

http://phpstack-500133-1583587.cloudwaysapps.com/~germand2/ubbthreads.php/topics/137899/1.html

Just MY point of view.
Until there can be some kind of excepted reason for the Christmas SS dagger, I don't see a end to the guessing.
Yes, they could have been prototypes, just never put into production.
Yes they could have been limited runs going to just a few.
Yes they could be those fakes, or fantasy pieces.
Question:
Do we know how many there are? How many documented examples are there?
I mean, if there are only about 6 around today, all the above statements could be true.
Lets face it. German items from the war days are plentiful.
Lionel trains were toys from the 40's, there are as many as you want today in any condition you want. Some items falling into the same slot as these daggers.
It;s 2020, we are not going to get everyone on the same boat.
Ed

So I hope the last posters understand now what the word PROTOTYPE means..

It seems people ignore the facts when not to there liking..
Again( If original )these at best are just a short run a limited run of early production daggers.. NOT PROTOTYPE.. Either there is a language problem or maybe heads are in the sand..
There is NO wiggle room here..

There are documents of Krebs,Eickhorn and Alcoso SS prototypes.. Made one or just stayed in the design stage.. and some of these have been faked but very badly..

Damast,

Are those the later ones ?

Dave

Herman,

Thanks, I'd forgotten that topics. Less was known about the SA prototypes at the time. Since then at least two EP&S and two Eickhorns SAs have surfaced which adds some clarity.

The best info I have seen on the SA prototypes was Tom Wittmann's presentation at the 2015 MAX Seminar.

Dave

Hello Dave,

I only know about 2 extra, period SA Christmas daggers, that have surfaced during the past 13 years, since that topic.
Of course, I have encountered about a dozen or more fabrications, of which several with the wrong pointed eagle, that is also shown in that new booklet.
The SA Christmas dagger appears also in a couple old reference books and articles of militaria magazines.
But you will not find anything written before 2019, about any SS Christmas dagger. And now at least 4 -all full Rohm by the way!- would have surfaced in just 1 year, via the same, very small group of people... On top of that they dare to state that: "We hope that this reference may pull a few more out of the woodwork (maybe even an Eickhorn!!!)."
Anyone with some years in the hobby, knows what that means: it is like winning the jackpot in Vegas, 4X in a row and being sure to win some more times.
Good luck in Vegas!

Best regards,

Herman

This thread shows one of the eagles that are noted in the book from a stickpin collection
The swastika seems a little 'pooched out' in the center and the tips of the swastika are slightly 'clipped' at an angle.

http://www.warrelics.eu/forum/non-combat-uniforms-related-insignia-third-reich/stick-pin-collection-14831/#post2056845

Tex,

Exactly ! You hit the nail on the head.

The SA Prototypes all had the exact same unique eagle. Both Eickhorn and EP&S. Different retention method, but identical eagle that was NOT seen anywhere else.

Dave

Damast,

Are those the later ones ?

Dave





Krebs and Alcoso are later Eickhorn would be 1933-35 ballpark

I agree with Herman when he says:

"Of course, I have encountered about a dozen or more fabrications, of which several with the wrong pointed eagle, that is also shown in that new booklet."

He is speaking of SA prototype fakes, not only EP&S and Eickhorns, but at least two other supposed makers. They have been around for 15 Years or more.

Dave

Quite a bit is known about the SA prototypes made by both Eickhorn and EP&S. That generates an interesting question:

Should The SS daggers in this book, made by EP&S, share the common characteristics of these SA daggers ... except, of course, the rune button, grip color, and scabbard color ?

Dave

Tom Wittmann has done a new video on SA daggers including some very interesting footage on the earliest SA daggers.


https://youtu.be/vuGKkphe1hs

Dave

Hello Dave,

I regret now, not having taken photo's of those fabrication, when possible.

May Den70 did that during his search for the original Christmas daggers?

Would be great if we could post some here and/or in the Christmas SA topic

Best regards,

Herman

Herman,

I will look through my files as I have saved some. They started appearing after TW's book of SS daggers which showed my EP&S SA prototype or Christmas Dagger.

The problem is that some of the owners think they have the real thing.

Dave

Hi Dave,

Yes that is a big problem, because not only the owner will defend his dagger, but even more the seller of the bad dagger will do everything to hide his fraud.

When I posted my SA Christmas dagger for the first time here on GDC, about 15 years ago, I immediately received e-mails of "collectors" that I did not know, asking for close-ups of the several components of the dagger and its scabbard..

I remember that, thanks to your wise advise at the time, I did not send them anything and even removed a couple more detailed pictures from my postings.

I believe now that, that is an element why it took the fakers quite some time, before they got the early eagle right... It also explains why we still get to see these wrongly shaped eagles, like one of the discussed SS Christmas daggers shown.

Best regards,

Herman

Hi Dave ...just a question of clarity in your posts ....Do you believe the dagger shown on the booklet cover is fake ?
If you think the grip eagle is fake , do you think the rest is real?

Best Regards Larry

Larry,

Good question. I have been pondering a response since I first saw that dagger. I keep hoping to see another early SS dagger.

Dave

Larry, Herman, and others ...

No point in saying something is "fake" or "righteous" or "real" without looking at the details - ALL the details and then figuring out what it is. So, What do you see ? There are lots of pictures on WA at:

https://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/fo...rum/968584-rare-ss-pack-prototype-dagger

Post pictures to make a point if you want. With a little effort, we can figure out what it is or isn't.

Dave

Said another way: What is the basic dagger ?

Hi Dave,

I have participated to the discussion on WAF.
Making it short, I see several problems with this dagger:

- The eagle: clearly a fabrication from the time, when the fakers were still lacking detailed pictures from the "pointed eagle", used in authentic Christmas daggers

- The blade shows very atypical age spotting, making me believe is was done purely artificially.

- Except for the grip wood, the other dagger pieces are probably original from cannibalizing a good early Pack SA and/or SS dagger.

- The green "verdigri" was applied artificially in my opinion: it appears naturally only when metals get in long term contact with leather, typically on vertical SS hangers for example. But why would there be "verdigri" on the eagle and on the guards?

- Also, the way the whole topic on WAF was set in scene: posted by an new member, proposing his "find", but who wants to remain unknown... (while everyone in the hobby knows who owns this bad dagger!)
Next some experienced collector/dealers ignore all the negative remarks made and state that the dagger is all good and period!

To me this looks this is a typical trap to get an expensive fabrication promoted and accepted, making it ready to sell off for big $$$$.

Best regards,

Herman

PS: By the way when, as usual, I was giving my honest opinion on the dagger, I got contacted directly by several of the dagger's promoters trying to silence me...

Thanks, Herman,

You answered the question as to what was the basic dagger used here:

"Except for the grip wood, the other dagger pieces are probably original from cannibalizing a good early Pack SA and/or SS dagger"

I think the first to spot this was JR, a very knowledgeable man as concerns SS daggers. He posted this photo of the lower scabbard fitting .

This is what that same fitting on my Christmas dagger looks like. (please pardon the 20 year old pic)

And here is JR's photo of an early SA taken in his office:

(Post 157 on WA)

Dave,

I saw that picture before, but don't get the point... you mean that the ball appears a bid larger than usual?

That is mainly because of the angle of that picture and also because it appears not to have been crushed...

There are plenty of variations around...

Here is another larger one... and I am not even using a special angle!

Best regards,

Herman

Herman,

The point is that the lower scabbard fitting closely resembles an early production EP&S dagger rather than that of a prototype. I suspect that the entire dagger, except for the grip and blade is a production dagger rather than one of the SA-type prototypes.

More later

Dave

Hello Dave,

That I can fully agree with!

But I understood that JR tried to make a point with this image on WAF, in support of that fabricated Christmas dagger... strangely enough for someone specialized in SS-daggers...

Best regards,

Herman

[i][i]- The green "verdigri" was applied artificially in my opinion: it appears naturally only when metals get in long term contact with leather, typically on vertical SS hangers for example. But why would there be "verdigri" on the eagle and on the guards?[/i][/i]

I have seen in 50 years a few instances of small amounts of the green stuff on parts of a crossguard or eagle. Not many, but a few.[i][/i]

The process of going through all the parts and trying to establish their origin or "parentage" can be very instructive.

When I first found my EP&S SA Christmas dagger, well over 20 years ago, there was a lot less known about the SA prototypes. The French book showed the blade of an Eickhorn prototype and Major John Angolia's book shows an early motto Eickhorn blade on page 21- the early production version with the normal grip. That motto matched mine. I compared the dagger components to other early SA components.

Here are three of the photos I took. Excuse the quality - these were taken with an ancient Sony Mavica 1

Back to the dagger.

The verdigris: I mostly associate it with leather on nickel silver - SS vertical hangers - but like Tex, I have seen small traces on eagles and crossguards so there is little to say there.

The scabbard screws have all been removed and replaced, but very carefully. The traces are there if you look closely. What that implies I have no idea. Anyone have thoughts ?

The dagger, except for the nail between the eagle's legs, is mostly covered in a brown slightly green gunk. Probably nicotine but maybe age. TW's first SA EP&S prototype (shown below) has a similar but lighter coating that was on the dagger pretty solidly. Opinions on this are solicited

More later

Ooops. Got a post photo wrong so I'll start again

The diameter of the small ring on the scabbard is the smaller size used in later production daggers

Here is my Pack Christmas dagger, on top, compared to two later production SAs. Notice the larger hole. Again, apologies for ancient photo.

Dave

Interesting to note also, in the above photo, that the assembler had to use a file to enlarge the throat opening slightly for the top dagger. From the cuts - on the top right and lower left it was probably done to add a little room for the thickest part of the blade.

And the middle dagger had the opening widened at the extreme left and right ... most probably because the edges of the blade at the top - its widest part - had trouble getting getting in.

The scabbard finish.

The ERM book, in the table on page 14, lists the finish as "Prototype finish"

This is the first time I have seen that definition used for an SA, NSKK, or SS dagger. The known SA prototypes have different finishes. The Eickhorns that have turned up have everything from solid copper bodies to all steel(?) bodies. The EP&S scabbards are all like the later production daggers with 'anodized' finishes or the remain of such.

I have seen the occasional SS dagger with a finish similar to the dagger we are talking about, but never paid enough attention or photographed the dagger.

Next, the dagger itself. First I am going to re-read the WA thread on this dagger.

Dave

Hello Dave,

That is very interesting comparing information, you posted here! Many thanks!

But are you not giving away too much information for the fakers of these Christmas daggers?

Best regards,

Herman

Herman, Thanks. Just about all that I posted is a remix of what was said on WA.

Speaking of Wehrmacht Awards, I re-read that entire threw. Phew! 87 pages. Lots of great information and opinions. Also lots of participation by the masters of the hobby: Pat, JR, Herman, Den, Frogprince, Damast, etc.

So, on to the dagger

The blade:

The back has the full Röhm dedication and the EP&S trademark. Pat says: "... this is not a known E Pack inscription but I cannot see any red flags." He knows more than I do about these.

The front has the SS motto in a script similar to that used on SA prototypes. Is it correct ? With nothing for comparison, no one can say.

Opinion was very mixed about the blade, even with a deep analysis of the letters by Den on WA post # 740

Fake "prototype" mottos are rarer than fakes of the later motto, but they do exist:

Here is one where the faker had it going the wrong way

And another - a fake Eick with a wonky trademark and dedication on the back

There was much discussion on WA about the rusting of the blade and the technicalities of rust and pin holes. I saw a grey blade, but that is not unexpected in a dagger of this age.

The key question here: "Is this a prototype blade or a later production blade ?" cannot be answered without seeing the tang. The prototype and later SA tangs are much different. Hopefully the owner will show us someday.

The crossguards:

To me, they look more like early production EP&S guards than the ones on my SA Christmas dagger. As with the tang, seeing the insides of the guards will be a key to the full identity of the dagger. There are minimal traces of verdigris on the undersides of the upper crossguards.I've seen this before on SS daggers.

The grip:

The wood does not bother me. Many SS grips were made of lighter wood that was dyed and has later faded. A look at the grip out of the guards might tell more.

The eagle

The WA thread established that the eagle was the same as a lapel pins marked RZM 69.

The question that generates is "why would EP&S use a lapel pin rather than the unique eagle that they, and Eickhorn, used on the SA Christmas daggers or prototypes ?". One poster speculated that the original eagle was lost from the grip and this was a quick fix.

Those are my thoughts on the dagger. As I said above, it reminds me more of a 1934 production dagger than a prototype. JR saw it first. His post 282 on WA from 28 February 2020:

"I too like this one as it shows Pack fingerprint features of the entire hilt assembly, consistent with SS M33's that they began manufacturing in 1934"

Anyone have questions ?

Excellent analysis, Dave!

No need for 87 pages of posts here on GDC, to see what this really is...

What is really surprising, is the number of different attempts that were made to copy the early eagle... on top of this version, just look at all the variations in this other post:

https://forum.germandaggers.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=349052&page=1


I am also still amazed how many WAF-members, including well known dealers! , do believe in such daggers...

In my opinion, this explains why faking and fabricating daggers (and other miltaria collectibles) will always remain a very lucrative business... many people simply want to get fooled!

Many thanks and best regards,

Herman

I've added a few more pictures to that thread - there is some duplication

Hi Dave I have been reading and watching and I do have a few questions ...... as your post is unclear, do you believe this dagger is a fabrication?
Do you agree with Hermann that the blade is fake?..... Or do you think this is an authentic 1934 early variation of some type"

Best Larry

Larry,

The tang of the blade will tell whether it is a prototype blade or an authentic early 1934 blade. Nobody has an acknowledged real one for comparison. Maybe we'll see that someday.

The inside of the crossguards and a comparison with production guards, plus what the top and bottom of the grip look like will settle the grip issue. Again, maybe ....


You are pretty good at SA/SS what is your take ?


I'll add that when I found mine a long time ago I thought it was a fake with a hand carved grip, a stickpin eagle nailed to the grip and a wonky blade. Angolia's book helped me ID the blade and the analysis of the parts suggested it was something different ... not a production piece. Then TW found his and I drove up and we compared them. Voila.

Dave

Hi Dave ..... I believe the dagger is an authentic piece that was produced in the period as it is,... including the grip eagle and
whether it was produced either in late 1933 or early 34.

Forgive me for not understanding but I want to be clear on this part ...You are saying without seeing the internal markings of the grip ,tang, and guards ,,that you dont know if this dagger was produced in that period time frame?

Since the thread on the WAF and the span of time between that thread and this current one..I have delved into researching it further and as I said in my opening statement above I believe it to be authentic.

Thats all I will comment on this at this time.

Best Regards Larry

Larry,

To clarify - the tang and internal grip and crossguard markings will tell if it was made in 1933 - i.e. a prototype (Christmas dagger) or early 1934 -i.e. a dagger made on production tooling.

Best wishes,
Dave

Hello Dave,

I would be very, very surprised, if you ever will get to see those markings...


Hello Larry,

Why are Dave, Den70 and I so openly posting our Christmas daggers on the forums, while the owner of that SS-dagger is hiding, for years now, behind his alias "Rohmdagger"?
Even now... when everyone knows who the real owner is?
What is there to hide if the owner is sure about his piece's authenticity?

Best regards,

Herman

So Dave has seen the insides and confirmed that it is a period piece, not fake or fabricated whatsoever, he just believes it was produced, at least in part, with production parts in likely early 34.

https://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/fo...584-rare-ss-pack-prototype-dagger/page95