UBB.threads Forums Edged Weapons SS Dagger Forum M36 Chain........

Can someone post a close up of the Skull link on their M36 SS Chain Dagger, TYPE I CHAIN ? Appreciate it. JR

L2

That's what I needed Sir. I'll be back with perhaps a new theory on Type I, Type II and Type II-A

Type I runes

Type I skull

Don't know if this will work, but will try to post a slight variation skull link.

Well, it worked! This chain is plated steel and is typical of Type I chains in all respects (connectors, DRGM marking, SS "proof," etc.). The skull itself is slightly different than those more commonly seen. The upper bone ends touch the border, the "nose hole" is larger, the skull itself is larger, the "eye holes" are larger and of a different shape, the skull is rounder or not quite as ovate as usually seen. I have no doubt as to its authenticity and have never seen another like it. It may have been made during the shortage of M36 scabbards, shortly after that model was approved, and perhaps privately purchased. However, it makes no sense to me that it is made of steel. I would think a "jeweler's copy," or something similar, would have been made of a softer metal such as copper, brass, nickel-silver, etc. The chain, when viewed as a whole, is quite imposing.

Another

Dey do have nice toofesses!!

OK, so those basically are the 2 types of chains that most of us are familiar with when the discussion turns to M36 daggers. The Type II is the one that I posted and Bernie, Cliff, and Geoff posted the Type I variation.

When inspection Type II chains over the years of collecting, every once in a while I have come across an M36 in which the beveled connectors to the Wotan's knot, seem a little wider than some of the other Chained Daggers equip with Type II chains. I had always assumed that this anomaly was due to the fact that some daggers weren't worn as much as others, and the wear on these connectors was less.

That is until recently when I took a very close look at one of these M36's that had this minute variation in the construction of the beveled connectors. Here is what I have observed, and to try to keep the discussion so that it can be understood, I'll use the terms that we are all use to ie. Type I & Type II. But in reference to the one that I want to show here, lets just call it Type II - A

Here are the features and characteristics of the "Type II- A" links, that I have observed.

1. The pebbling on these chains is less course and therefore didn't hold the burnishing as well at the typical Type II chains. As every one that I have inspected the burnishing was diminished even thought the daggers were un-cleaned and the chain as well.

2. The skulls on these Type II-A chains were more detailed when it came to the teeth, nose, and even the nose septum, a detail that I can't remember seeing with either your Type I chains nor the normally seen Type II's.

3. The shape of the skull and eye sockets appear different than what is normally seen on Type II's.

4. The distance between the actual runes, is less than what is seen on normal Type II's.

5. The connectors to the Wotan's Knot, while being beveled, are not as narrow cut and shaped as we see on the Type II's that we are familiar with.

Does anyone see these features in the above posted skull link ? I will post some photos of the Runes link and the beveled connectors. You can also see this type of chain in Witty Offering 40 page 171. And you can see the connectors on page 201 of his "Big Bible".

Was there possibly a third chain vendor that made these pieces for the M36 dagger ? Were these differences due to the die getting tired or worn ? What are your thoughts ?

JR

Once again, here is the skull link that we normally associate with Type II chains. It is a different M36 skull link that I initially posted at the beginning of this topic.

Cliff, that is real interesting as I just read your post. I truly think that if we look at the sheer number of chain scabbards that would have possibly been made for the SS, one would have to possibly think that there were more than 2 firms responsible for the manufacturing of these assemblies.

I really to tired to comment on anything but I thought that I would make you a better comparison picture. I defently do see the different though.

Please tell me how you do that My Friend........ I'll give you one of these daggers ! Thank you sooooooo much !

One again, the normally seen Type II beveled connector..........

And here........

And the Type II-A beveled connector...

I am on my wireless laptop so I don't have any fancy programs to work with, but I just cut and pasted it in the windows paintbrush program. Just call up each picture into a different paintbrush window and open a new blank paintbrush window then cut out of each picture and paste to blank paintbrush window. Once you learn how you will find that it is almost easier then the fancy dancy programs doing the old paintbrush way. Anyways about the free dagger, I think you have my address still, I like the II-A style best so sender on out.

You've got my marker, Sir ! I'm going to have to learn this technique. You're the Master and I the student on this one !

JR, is'nt this variation what's known as the Type-X, or am I thinking of something else? Regards, teufel

These Type X's (or Type II-A's) have been discussed before (I have one). But the difference in the bevelled connectors hasn't been noticed before. Well spotted JR!

The three different "Types" follow, BUT, as Grumpy has posted further up this thread, there is at least one more Type of Type I chain as well!
(Be nice to have a closer photo of that Grumpy!).

The differnt bevels:-

Slightly "enhanced" copy of Grumpy's photo of the different Type I link:-

Interesting. I just found this great discussion on chains done by Fred and you other members. I didn't know that this had taken place but the infomation in this thread is very valuable. Thank you so much !

Type X Chains

As I had mentioned, a very noticible characteristis of the Type X/ Type II- A chains, is that the burnishing on these links didn't hold as well as what we call the Type II. Vic Diehl show this with his not only on this site, but on page 152 of Witty's Bible. I too agree with Fred (Frogprince) that the Type X / Type II-A chains are the earliest chain daggers produced. They have a vere heavy nickel content to them, are found only on early M36's, and are found far and few between in comparison to the Type II chain.

Here is a comparison shot of the Type X runes(right) link comparied to the Type II (left ). You'll notice not only are the runes a different size and shape, but also the distance between them is quite different.

Something to consider on these connector links is that MANY have been replaced over the years and MANY replaced ones or almost all replaced ones are not exact duplicates of the originals. This makes it more complicated and more difficult to determine what is in fact a true original variation ( IMO one would have to see several-all the same) to correctly label a type as a variation. In the old days and over the years I have seen MANY MANY chained SS daggers come out of the woodwork with broken and missing connectors and links. Now -you never see any-all repaired. It would be revealing to have just Manfred and Vern comment on an estimate of how many they alone have repaired over the years--and that is just two restorers.

That's true Houston, and these replacements are usually seen being made from steel and can be detected by a magnet when one is inspecting a nickel chain. But the beveled connectors on the Type X chain are nickel, matched in color/ patina, and consistant with the other connectors,when one of these Type X chains are found unaltered or repaired. Plus the Type X chain has a different Rune Link and a different Skull link than the other two types of chains. There definitely has to be at least a third firm that made these assemblies and perhaps more.

Do we see the Type 2A or X show up on any of the early SOLID nickle silver chains or only on the later plated version. The only ones I have seen seem to be plated. I think we have a third hardware manufacturer......Jimmy

Jimmy, these Type X are all heavy nickel chains and I believe they may have been the first produced. You don't see these chains made out of anything other than nickle.

Schonitz, Would you be so kind to post a photo of your beveled connectors on your M36 ?

JR-I would have to say that MANY replaced connecting links are made of nickel and MANY from real silver. More this way than steel IMO. Sometimes for uniformity-ALL connecting links were replaced so that all would be the same. I know you don't like to hear that but------it is true. It just makes it more difficult to make valid conclusions about variations.

How about the skull and runic links Houston ? Those are different and clearly pointing to another manufacture. JR

I know that the "old guard" doesn't want to think that the "young greenhorns" found something that they never knew exsisted, but we did.

JR-You are 100% wrong when you say that. I was only pointing out the connecting links aspects of the '36 and the fact that many have been replaced. Personally I have no interest in who made the chains or how many different small variations there are. I will be sure not to mention anything for you to consider again.

It may just be these old, tired eyes, but I think I'm seeing at least 3 variations of the "Type I." In my experience, the most common seems to be the style posted by Bernie early on.

Just made a comparison of my Type II and Type X and they conform, including the cloverleaf connectors, as JR noted. Was aware of the skull differences, but really hadn't paid attention to the runes and connectors.

Compared the center bands on Type II and Type X. The raised boder on Type II is considerably thicker and higher.

Houston, I hear what you are saying about replacement connectors etc. What I have tried to point out from the beginning of this topic is:

1. There is at least one or more chain assemblies that were period produced other than the Type I and Type II that collectors are most familar with.

2. The Type X chain assemblies are in fact noticably different than the Type I and Type II configurations, and most likely at the very least a different set of dies, if not a totally different manufacture all together.

3. And finally, the beveled connectors on Type X chain assemblies are unique to this maker, and not just simply a replacement for a broken or damaged chain. They can in fact be identified and associated with the Type X chain.

We have all identified Type I and Type II Chain Daggers from the connector to the Wotan's knot. Type X chains can also be identified by the type of beveled connector that was used on these type of chains.