Hello Gentlemen.
Here my new addition, a KM dagger by maker Puma with a belt and hanger. In my opinion a textbook one by this maker.
Your opinions are welcome. Thanks for looking.
Best regards,
Oleg.
... nice one.
Best; Hermann
That's a maker that is still missing in my collection
Textbook piece. Very nice. Thanks for showing.
Danny
Thank you guys.
Regards, Oleg.
Imho PUMA navies are quite scarce. the condition of this dagger is appreciating, the sailing ship etching and the full rig a nice addition. Also interesting is the non regulation binding of the portepee around the crossguard.
Thank you for showing.
Regards,
Nice administrative hangers too. Love the " been there" patina of the entire ensemble.
Rick
... this silverish appearance could be the pics.
I think you are right Hermann. The clips clearly are guilted brass. Simply the exposure. Thanks for clarifying.
Best, Rick
Very nice Puma!
The neck of the bird has had additional work and also some filing of the beak. This improves the look!
I got back from overseas yesterday and mine was waiting for me!
All details are the same but without filing of the pommel.
This is my Puma pommel. Interesting to compare. I have not managed to get any other decent photos yet but snapped this with my phone. They are minature works of art.
The blade is a really, really good example but it`s so hard to get good pictures with glaring light reflection.
Notice anything about the portepee? this officer didn`t tie it as usual and has not put the acorn through the last loop under the cross-guard. Instead tying it in place with wrapped thread! Took a peek at the reverse and moved the thread to one side and underneath it was bright so it was always this way.
JR had a nice Puma for sale a few weeks ago and I would have liked that one but restrictions, import tax and postage makes international buying a bit of a bum deal. Then this came up at home.
Thank you very much for sharing, Landser.
Very nice dagger indeed.
Best, Oleg.
yeah, great Puma. Killer blade in a lovely patinated dagger. Exactly as we do love them. Good purchase, Vaughan.
Best;
Hermann
The Oleg 67` Puma is post war product with "frankenstein" pommel. Sorry, guys, but it`s right.
The Oleg 67` Puma is post war product with "frankenstein" pommel. Sorry, guys, but it`s right.
Please, can you enlighten us why this is your opinion?
Regards,
If you compare the pommel of introdused dagger with pommel of Puma` dagger in Wittman book you can sure that it is perfectly different pommels.
Moveover the pommel design of dagger represented by Landser coinside with Puma` dagger in Wittman book, but not coinside with Oleg 67` pommel design.
However Landser` dagger also cause the mistrust, because I don`t see the remain of gilding near the scabbard bands, around screws, under the throat and in hollow between the bands and eyelets.
Regards,Sergiy.
Ukrainian,
I see this is your first post, so welcome to the Forum. Are you collecting Navies?
Personally I hate to disagree with fellow collectors, but here I have to, I'm afraid.
The dagger shown by Oleg67 is in my humble opinion a legit Puma example and not made postwar. BTW, actually I'm not aware of the fact that Puma made daggers after the war. H�rster, Eickhorn, yes, but Puma ?
All the signs which makes this maker outstanding are there.
To compare this eagle pommel w/ the one featured by Tommy in his important work is a difficult thing. First of all there is always some handwork on most of these eagles, because of the cast process where the craftsman had to remove some brass parts and to make some places more distinct.
But the main problem with the large eagle shown by Tom Wittman is the fact, that the area with the Swaz has been damaged to indistinction, so an important area is not in proper condition for a comparison.
Focus a judgement on an eagle pommel of the 1938 pattern daggers is just ONE point to check these daggers, but it is just one of many others.
Best regards;
Flyingdutchman
ukrainian , first let me apologize that I have overread that these are your first postings and let me you also welcome you to the forum.
Concerning the eagle Flyingdutchman has already said the facts.
Concerning the "gildig" (please believe me, in 99,999% of III.R. navy daggers it is NO gilding but a certain surface Treatment), what remails of it depends totally on the treatment and the surroundings the dagger has to pass, so a total loss of the "gilding" on an original III.R. navy dagger is not something extraordinary and for sure no sign of a fake.
Regards,
Gentlemen!
Sorry about long silence.I have not great mood to think about anything but Ukraine.Putin Huylo has grave acts of agressing against my country.But I`m grateful for your consideration to my post.
1.I am collecting Navies.
2.I have the list of firms had made post war Navies
-Holler
-Horster
-Eickhorn
-Luneschloss
-Puma
-Pack
This list from ukrainian magazine Blade (Клинок).Author of thinkpiece(paper) is russian dagger spesialist Andrey Dolinin.
3.When I had compare Oleg67`pommel with Tom Wittman` book Puma pommel I was looking not at the swaz,but at
-shape of the wings
-shape of the head
-length and thickness of the neck.
If you compare this things again you can see this is a different pommels. I do not think that Puma(and enother firms) had changed his pommels design around short time from 1.1.38 to 31.12.44(only 7 years).
For argument that Oleg67`Puma is questionable please compare his pommel with pommel of Horster Navi #35968 in Wittman sale site.You can see that this is exactly the same.One or the other is queer.right?
Other parts of Oleg67` dagger are concide to Puma dagger:early Horster`c.guard,blade with specific Puma etching,generic scabbard with headless screws.But all of this one can be had made post war.
4.Reference the gilding i know the surface of all parts had not only gilding but had covered by laquer.This option had strengthen the gilding and remains of gilding must be on.Herewith the edge of remains have very sharp-cut edge.
I have the book Daggers of World by russian author Fedurin(Федурин).The book is sinoptic but here is good photos of Puma in this book,and clearly shows remains of gilding and laquer.
Regards.Sergiy.
Sergiy,
I'm not here to defend any daggers, this just for the records.
But I think in a public forum some things have to be commented, otherwise indistinct or wrong informations will be here forever. One of the reasons why Vic and I wrote our book about German Naval daggers is, that nobody can correct our mistakes. ;-))
I'm afraid that your list is not correct when it comes to Puma. I'm still not aware of any Puma made post-war Naval daggers. That someone etches a name on a blade doesn't mean it comes from the factory. Are you certain, that Mr. Dolinin's list refers to German Navy daggers?
One thing I have to consider. The neck of the eagle on Oleg's dagger is definitely long, when we are looking on this photo. Thin and long, and I have to admit not a beauty. But does this create a fake ? Not in my world when we agree to the point that handwork on these eagles is necessary. One have to look closely on the surface patina to compare the eagle with the rest of the dagger.
To look just at the surface of the brass fittings after more than 70 years will not be very helpfull. To underline what I mean I've added a quick photo. You will see so many different shades of (no, not grey) gold, yellow, brown one will not believe.
I think here on this forum my own 1929 Puma dagger will be somewhere. If I may, I would recommend you to look on the near mint fire gilding. Of course, no eagle, so it will not be helpfull with this question.
I'm not able to say anymore to this question, I never had Oleg's dagger in my hand. Of course I can be wrong, but I doubt.
Best;
Flyingdutchman
Gentlemen,
it is not easy to discuss with an "expert" from the former Soviet Union forever. The problem with these people is that they got edged weapons of the 3rd Reich until about 10 years ago to see for the first time. Some of them have immediately thought that this little experience is enough to write a book or an article. The others have read these books and articles and have accepted as only one truth. Of course, with all the mistakes that are in it. And now they are firmly convinced that they only have correct knowledges. They explain, for example, an SA dagger for fake just because it has an error in the etching of the logo.
Honestly, I have no time and no desire with such "experts" to discuss. From my experience I know that it makes no sense. These people are convinced forever believe that only they are right.
Best regards, Oleg.
Gentlemen!
It is characteristically for the some people with soviet provenance and upbringing to go in for selfdeception.It is much easier and more comfortable than to take a critique and to understand the opinion have not coincident with own one.Let it be,good luck!Unfair dealers are cheers!
To the point I did two of my links to Wittman.How about him?
Regards.Sergiy.
Gentlemen,
as ukrainian already said, the article of Mr. Dolinin is the base of his knowledge about the German edged weapons. Indeed, still two years ago Mr. Dolinin wrote in a Russian forum about the picture of a M1929 dagger "navy dagger 1919 pattern" and about the picture from miniature dagger from WKC "navy dagger1848 pattern". The topic in the Russian forum still exists. I have corrected the Posts of Mr. Dolinin in the Russian forum. It was no problem for Mr. Dolinin. He has learnt what again in addition. Everybody which is interested in the subject Navy has to go constantly learns. Unfortunately, it looks different by ukrainian. He believes that his knowledge is only perfect. And he needs nothing more to learns. Unfortunately, I cannot change this. I let him live with his "perfect" knowledge.
Regards,
Oleg.
To Flyingdutchman:
Dear Hermann,
I'm afraid that the ukrainian has no notion of your book. It is quite normal for the "experts" from the former USSR. Therefore, I would like to show to the ukrainian a picture of your book, with it he generally knows with whom he discusses.
Regards,
Oleg.
Gentlemen, please keep on serious comments concerning a dagger/daggers but stop comments on persons. It is my honest opinion that everybody here does his comments on daggers out of believe and NOBODY is unfailable.
Flyingduchman, who has written a very EXPERIENCED book and who is -due to his posts in several forums- a very EXPERIENCED member and collector - has said his opinion which I can only confirm.
Also there is experience beside books (which Flyingdutchman obviously does have!) and not all is written in the books. The big dealers like the mentioned TTW have seen a lot but also have not seen all. It is a big merit from TTW that he has started with his book series and has documented a special kind of collecting in regard of manufacturers and several variations of manufacturers but there is also not all in these books.
Therefore such forums like this here is invaluable because it compresses the knowledge of experienced collectors with all the knowledge out of books, attending shows, inspecting collections, visiting the net and collecting themselves. Priceless.
Therefore I close this thread until new facts concerning the dagger do rise, Dave is in knowledge per mail.
Regards,
"Dear wotan,
Posted for Oleg...............
my opponent in the tread about naval dagger Puma, ukrainian, has brought the book and the web page of Thomas Wittmann as arguments. So I have sent to Mr. Wittmann an email with pictures of the dagger and with the question about his opinion about the dagger. Here is his answer from today:
"Dear Oleg,
Thanks for the email and pictures. I am currently away at a show and do not have access to my book, but the dagger appears to be a textbook Puma example.
Best,
Thomas T. Wittmann"
