UBB.threads Forums Edged Weapons Army, Navy, and Luftwaffe Forum Early Undocumented Holler Army Crossguard

I am posting this is as a follow-on to the "Early Holler" string started by Janos. I am hoping that both Janos and Doug will respond and post.

I believe this Holler is a transitional piece between the earlier Hollers just mentioned and the Pack based Holler shown on page 35 of Wittmann's book.

As you can see it is an early WKC based guard. However, it has enough differences that I believe qualify it as a unique variation. I should insert here that I have been gone from the forum for some time, so it is possible that a similar one has been uncovered.

Close up.

What makes it (in my opinion) a unique Holler guard is the tool work. On the picture above, notice the dark shadow in front of the eagle's beak and forehead, and then going over the top of the head. It is not tarnish, but removed material providing the shadow effect. The wings are also hand defined.

Finally, it has 2 features in common with the Wittmann pictured (page 35) guard. First, note the very round eye. They both have it. Next there is the unusual cresant shaped tool mark toward the back of the head. Here is the page 35 WIttmann guard.

Both together

The scabbard bands are exactly the same - both with the little acorns hammered in. This seems to be unique to these early Hollers. Also the throats are identical as are the screws.

I see I just entered a picture of a WKC first model crossguard by mistake. Just as well. Note there is no shadow chiseled into the background around the beak and forehead. Also note the typical sleepy eye (not round) of the initial production WKC crossguard.

The bands are below:

Here are the side bands. Note the two acorns on each - strong Holler characteristic for this time period.

In summary, I believe there is a strong case for this dagger being a transitional slant variety - between the earlier slant and the Pack based Holler crossguard. I believe this because of the many similarities between this dagger and the Pack/Holler. Janos and Doug, I would be happy if you post your daggers.

Ford,
Its good to have you back active on the forum, I missed your detailed analysis and attention to detail.
With regard to your fantastic early Holler what I find interesting is the evidence of the initial WKC tooling still present under the Holler hand enhancing. You can clearly see the remains of the lazy eye and the unique Holler tool mark to the rear of the head is positive confirmation that the eagle was adapted by the Holler factory.
When you say a unique pattern, I take it you mean that Holler purchased and enhanced early WKC crossguards with Holler characteristics in the transition period between the Holler 1st & 2nd in house guards?.
Would it not be possible due to the early fittings on your dagger and the heavy hand enhancing that it pre-dates both of Hollers early recognised patterns?. We know that many other makers utilised the 1st WKC on early first run daggers, Holler in my opinion, just went the extra mile with the extensive hand enhancing and the subtle appearance alterations.

Here is the apparent 2nd pattern with pack guard, note the lack of crescent tool mark to the rear of the head.....not all Hollers have it.

Degens:

Thanks and it is good to be back. I too thought this Holler predates all others at first. However, there are a couple of reasons I think it is after the Janos/Doug guards. 1)ALthough I do not show it, the crossgraining of the center segment on my dagger is vertical. On Doug Ritchie's dagger, I believe I could see horizontal graining on the center segment. The (Wittmann Page 35) Pack guards all seem to have vertical graining on the center segment. 2) The scabbards on my Holler and the Pack based Holler are identical. THey both have those fine little acorns chiseled in between the leaf bands, and on the ends of the bands. The Janos/Ritchie guards have bands that typical of initial production on many early daggers - unless I missed something.

Your Holler is beautiful. It appears to have that heavy silvering that you see on early Hollers. I see that in addition to missing the cresant tool mark, it also does not have the little horizontal marks on the neck (a Wotan identified characteristic for these pieces). I am wondering if it has the tapered tang and if the scabbard is the same as the Pack type? It does seem to have a very high quality blade like the early Hollers - with the vertical graining.

Ford,
Your observations on the 1st pattern Holler scabbards is a good point and as you say puts your WKC beauty later in Hollers initial production run.
To be honest and based on the few 2nd Holler examples I have seen with these Pack fittings ( including Wittmanns pictures on page 35 ) I was starting to believe that this pattern was in fact the final design utilised by Holler. The reason I say this is basically the overall quality of the base metal and the plating to the fittings in comparison with the other designs, including the 3rd more common pattern is lacking.
Mine also came with a generic scabbard which would suggest a later production and I have seen at least one other.
I am unable to check the tang on this one, it has never been apart and the grip is firmly attached.....I would be suprised if it was tapered.

However, after looking at your example of the Pack variation I am not so sure, it appears to be early base metal and heavily silvered as you would expect on a guard that pre-dates the recognised 3rd type?, if it is tapered then my theory goes right out of the window!. Wittmann also suggests late construction on his example posted on page 35 which I find interesting!.

Hopefully with this thread others will be prompted to post their early Hollers and I will not have to update my website when I am proved wrong .

My Holler has the identical cross guard as depicted in post #4 & the scabbard is also the same. It does have a tapered tang & the grain runs vertically up the central plane of the blade.

Vaughan,
Of course, I forgot you had a type 2 as well. I have just re-checked your old e-mail. Well as Ford suggested he may well have an additional pattern that slots in between the 1st & 2nd Hollers.
Now that I have learned the Pack type 2 can indeed have a tapered tang I will have to try and get a peek at mine again.....my curiousity has been aroused. Post some pictures if you get a minute, I am sure Ford will appreciate the dagger.

Unfortunately I don`t have a working camera at the moment but have managed to find just two pics amongst my jumbled files.

T`other

I have just edited these to try & show more detail. The scabbard bands are a treat!

6

This one unfortunately not quite in focus

Degens: Holler did go back to the Pack guard later in the period, and they did have the round eye, but no tool marks. I have examined or questioned others on about 8 of the Pack type guards with the cresent mark. They all had tapered tangs and vertical graining. Holler appears to have stayed with their vertical graining past their tapered tang period and then phased in horizontal graining again later on. The more common Holler guards can have vertical or horizontal graining on the center segment - depending on when the dagger was made. That is my opinion, but it is based upon observation. I agree your dagger looks late, and your scabbard supports that feeling, but the blade appears to have vertical graining - does it? If it does, I am as curious as you are about the tang.

Landser:
Your dagger is identical to mine in every way. It pre-dates the more common Holler guard. This is one of those very rare instances when Wittmann did not have it completely right. Thanks for posting your outstanding dagger.

All comments / pictures are welcome.

My pleasure. It is very interesting to note these small details & what makes this hobby so fascinating. I think your cross guard is absolutely wonderful. It is a joy to see the craftsmanship of the early heer daggers. In my opinion they have no equal.

Ford,
my camera is under service, so I can't make new shots of my H�ller dagger.
But I upload 3 pics what I have on my computer.
On the first photo you can see the ends of the scabbard bands.
Janos

2nd photo

3rd
Close up crossguard.

Ford,
you have a VERY interesting and rare dagger, congratulation!

Janos:

Great early Holler. As I said, I believe it is the initial production version for the reasons I stated earlier in the string. Can you verify the direction of the graining on the center section? Is it horizontal or vertical?

Ford as every one said so nice to see you back. Can you really call this crossguard a unique variation? Or an early WKC no doubt hand finished by Holler as evident by the distinct tool marks not only on the crossguard but the scabbard. I have only seen the little acorns hand tooled in the scabbard bands on a Holler but an impressive deduction on the crossguard work. A dagger anyone would be proud to own.

Here are some pictures of my Holler and again just like the Klaas I am in the dark about the age of my daggers. I've been collecting edges for years but never compaired the makers until I signed up to this site. Here are the pictures and let me know what you think. Mark

Tom: Thanks and it is very good to be back. Regarding the uniqueness of the WKC/Holler guard, it is as unique as the Wittmann identified Pack/Holler guard pictured on page 35 of Wittmann�s army book. In both cases, Holler took a common guard with a sleepy eye (the pack second guard and the WKC initial guard) and added a round eye and a crescent tool mark. They carried the round eye over to their later and more common molded guard. It is indeed only a modified guard of another maker, but so is the Pack/Holler guard and so it the Weyersberg guard for that matter. Admittedly, declaring it is an undocumented guard is a bit of an oversell, but I did that just to add to the fun of the string and draw more readers. With more readers, I was hoping another one would surface. By the way, the provenance of this dagger is unquestionable. This the the Ronald Weinan ? (sorry for the spelling Ron)Holler that was offered for sale on the forum several years ago. He assured me it was veteran purchased. I was thrilled when I saw the unique tool work. To me it Hollers Holler. (You have to be from the south to get that.) By the way Tom, I know you already know everything I stated above, but thanks for letting me say it again. I really want another one of these to pop up.

Ritterkreuz: Your dagger is correct. It has the common molded Holler crossguard for sure and appears to have the Holler pommel. The generic scabbard is correct for the dagger, especially with the white handle. Very attractive handle by the way. I am assuming it is not ivory. Your dagger is not an early one, but very appealing nonetheless and absolutely correct.

The handle isn't ivory, I wish it was, but its not. I have had this dagger for about 10 years now and take it down off the wall once a year to oil the blade and clean off the dust. Thanks, Mark

Here is another of the undocumented Holler guards that I was able to locate last month. The dagger has many similarities to the Holler that is the subject of this sting. You can clearly see the crescent mark in the back of the head. As with the subject Holler, this one also has material removed from around the head to and add depth to the head. The work on this guard though is far superior. The handwork is expertly applied, and much more material has been removed, giving a much more three dimensional look. I have never seen this much material removed from a guard. It is truly remarkable in person. The darker areas around the head are all the result of removed material.

Here are the two eagles perched together. You can see the hogged out areas around both heads, as well as the crescent tool mark. Again the work on the darker Holler is far superior. I believe it to be an earlier example.

Here is the darker Holler enjoying a little Florida Sunshine. You can clearly see the tool marks where material was hogged out on both sides of the eagles head resulting is darker areas, that are really shadows created by the concave effect. Also note the shadow created by the eagle�s beak, because it is relatively high off the surface.

The darker Holler is covered in black patina, but there are also very light spots. For example, the sides of the scabbard are light colored. At first I thought it was a case of lacquer gone wild, but I no longer believe that is the case.

Both daggers displayed side by side. The pommel work on the darker dagger is better executed, though the pommels are the same. Again, I believe the darker Holler is slightly earlier.

Here are both scabbards displayed side by side. The bands are identical. However, the darker holler has a more rounded throat. In fact the throat looks like the Initial Production Holler belonging to Janos. Again, I believe this is evidence that the darker Holler is the ealier.

Here is the back of the darker Holler. It has the typical Holler single center set screw.

Oh yes, the maker mark on the darker Holler. Note the uneven patina????

I believe this establishes once and for all the existence of another Holler variant, in between the initial production Hollers, and the Holler guards based upon the Pack 2nd style. I would like to hear the opinion of others.

Ford great dagger and research

Ford to be clear do you believe this to be a WKC that is heavily reworked or a unique guard pattern?

Tom,
My thoughts exactly, to me thats a heavily hand enhanced 1st WKC with Holler traits.
I think Mr Wittmann started the prescedence by calling the scarce 2nd Holler a unique pattern. Really its a modified E-Pack.
JMO

Tom/Degens:
Your points are well taken on the WKC origin of these guards. These are unique to Holler in the sense that is has been modified with Holler characteristics. It is as much a Holler guard as the Weyersberg guard is unique to that company. And as you mention Degens, we all know the rarer Holler guard in Wittmann's book is a specially enhanced Pack 2nd. THe Henkels guard also comes to mind.

Ford,
Apologies if the above the comment was a little abrupt, I was just about to call it a night.
I tend to use a slightly blinkered view when it comes determining the crossguard maker and I have to agree with you to a degree that this pairing does have all the attributes of a new early Holler variation, albeit with a WKC base crossguard.
The shadow areas left on the crossguard from the original head position, pre-chiseling is clearly evident and is quite breathtaking when you consider the actual size of the eagles head.

What I find interesting is that Holler used an external supplier of base crossguards on more than one occassion even though they were obviously capable of producing in house. If I have it correct the order of production in lamens terms was:
WKC 1st (Holler modified)
HOLLER 1st
E-PACK 2nd (Holler modified)
HOLLER 3rd
E-PACK 2nd* (Holler modified)

The patina on that latest dagger is fantastic, very rarely are they left untouched to form such a thick coat. Here is another WKC 1st, no enhancing but equally as black.

Degens: No offense taken whatsoever. I did perhaps oversell the new variation routine a bit. However, the approach draws more readers and creates healthy debate, which is generally a good thing.

That is one black WKC alright. It contrasts nicely with the Popsicle handle. And what a wicked looking eye and beak?

I have noticed a great variation in the number of accent lines cut into the breasts of Intial Production WKC Eagles. To me, ones with fewer cross hatching lines (like yours) are much more attractive. Very nice indeed!

Degens: I believe the tiny eagle was the initial production model. Here is my take on the chronology of the Holler guards and why:

1)Holler First - Tiny Eagle (Janos, Doug and Tom)
-Double side screws on scabbard � associated with initial production on WKC and Eickhorn.
-Horizontal cross-graining on center segment of blade
- No acorns on scabbard band ends.

2)Holler 2nd - WKC 1st Model
-Single reversed placed scabbard screw � cost cutting measure � used throughout period
-Vertical cross-graining on center segment of blade
-No acorns on scabbard band ends - on earlier example
-Acorns on scabbard band ends � on later example
-Round eye on later example
-Crescent tool marks on head.
-Hogged out material around head to add depth to casting

3) Holler 3rd - Pack 2nd Model with hand enhanced head
-Vertical cross-graining on center segment of blade.
-Crescent tool mark on head and markings on neck.
-Round eye
-Extremely detailed pommel with acorns impressed into surfaces between leaves
-Extremely detailed scabbard bands with well formed acorns
-Tapered Tang only
-Standard Handle � so far

4)Holler 4th - Standard Holler Guard
-Tapered tang early
-Vertical cross-graining on center segment early
-Horizontal cross-graining on center segment late
-Shouldered tang late
-Generic scabbard late

5) Holler 5th - Pack 2nd with round eye � no other hand work on head
-Shouldered tang only
-Generally seen with generic scabbard

What a great thread having IMO two of the greatest minds in the heer collecting community contributing. I will say I think the WKC 1st is one of the least appealing if not thee least of the early guards I can see why Holler so extensively enhanced some of these and the early Holler one of the most appealing.

Tom,
Beautiful Holler, the wing enhancing is fantastic and a friend of mine owns an identical Holler showing exactly the same detail. Your photography is also very impressive, clarity of pictures is the only way to really appreciate the work that went into these early pieces.

Ford,
Your account of Holler production makes perfect logical sense when you consider all of the small details from each variation.
With most makers, on the early slant daggers, you would expect to see a purchased or external guard fitted first in production order before switching to an in house production. The fact that both are found with slant grips and tapered tangs only confuses the issue.

Looking at your assessment of the details, acorns, blade crossgrain and scabbard screws etc, it suddenly becomes quite apparent which came first......in this case the chicken .
I suggest to anybody who collects army daggers to take note of Fords thorough explanation of production order for this maker, you will not find a more accurate or detailed account in any book currently available.

p.s I own 2 of the later Pack 2nd Hollers, both with generic scabbards, punched eyes and shouldered tangs.

Ford, firstly, it is a great pleasure to see you return and start this topic. Your Holler is a wonderful example, the hand work is exquisite and a joy to see. It is very thrilling to see something such as this!

Your analysis is thorough, detailed and perfectly logical. I am working in Africa at the present and was unable to respond earlier but Degens has echoed my own thoughts. The chronology of production is confusing. That Holler would produce their own x guard and then abandon it so early in favour of a competitors product does not really seem to make sense. It would only seem logical if the initial fitting was also not produced in house and that they subsequently decided to change supplier or just got a better deal from WKC? Your dagger certainly shows they were prepared to go to extraordinary lengths to personalise their products.

Tom, I have to agree that I share your opinion that the WKC is the least alluring of all the early types, but in the above instance a silk purse was truly made of a sow`s ear. Your`s is a great Holler and as we might expect you photography is again outstanding. I have a similar example that I must compare with yours when I get home. It has the same very fine feathering to the wings. Both my Alcoso share this characteristic and if I had to pick a favourite it would be a tough call.

This is just the type of lively & enlightening discussion that makes collecting these wonderful early pieces so exciting.

Great stuff here,I agree with the info that is posted.
FORD, Love your "DARKER" Holler! Great character in that eagle head,and the patina is beautiful! Kevin.