Plumacher is not a known producer of Rohm blades, that fact alone would lead me to be very suspicious of this example.
Billy is all right: that maker never made any Rohm-daggers, so it is not a period inscription.
Herman
The Rohm inscription is not ar the correct place if you compare it with the motto at the obverse.
Ron
I agree 100%
That said, we should be careful of rejecting a maker or dedication that has not been seen before. I think there may still be some surprises out there.
Dave
Hello ,
+1 with Dave , a french guy was pretending that a list of 21 makers of the Honour daggers i/o 16 , as it was usually known , was existing ! among them Jacobs and today Plumacher ...
Who is right ?
Seppi +
Hello ,
+1 with Dave , a french guy was pretending that a list of 21 makers of the Honour daggers i/o 16 , as it was usually known , was existing ! among them Jacobs and today Plumacher ...
Who is right ?
Seppi +
Hi Seppi,
The Plumacher shown in this topic is not an Original R?hm example! Just look at the Motto and the R?hm inscription you will see tthe dfference.
Ron
If you have not seen 10 ground Rohm's with this maker mark, yet... than you can be sure that the inscription was added post war to blow up the value of a standard M33 SA dagger.
This is very simple logic: over 95% of all Rohm daggers had their inscription fully or partially removed after Rohm purge in the summer of 1933!
Best regards,
Herman
