UBB.threads Forums Edged Weapons SA & NSKK Dagger Forum NSKK High Leader

I will say this: The topic has certainly created a heightened awareness of the H�hnlein daggers. And the thread is a long one. What was first a discussion of fit and craftsmanship underwent an evolutionary process as the items under discussion began to be evaluated in more detail. Discussed at length have been the etching and form of the signature. The hallmarks and the cast wide belt connector piece, and to a lesser extent the center scabbard fitting with the brass (?) rivet.

Some additional characteristics that might be worth a look. Especially if the item is being looked at in person, or becomes a part of a Q & A discussion, is what looks like in the first set of images more of a brown leather scabbard covering with a layer of black on top. Black leather German holsters and leather accouterments generally don�t have this appearance as they age/wear unless they have been dyed to change the color (which was purposely done with some items). Also the flattened wire link. Not typical of a conventional forming die it�s not wear, although wear does show the flattened surface to a better advantage. (Image # 1)

Again what seems in the image to be more of a brown leather covering on the scabbard. And possibly some more flattened wire links. And what could be cast chain links themselves. Some of the appearance on the rear of others posted also might be indicative of casting. But the level of detail is not good enough to form a conclusion and it is just a matter of interest if a detailed examination is being made. (Image # 2)

PS: Silver as a metal is no harder to stamp than nickel silver. From a manufacturing standpoint with small basically flat metal objects casting is much more labor intensive than stamping and not as precise. The trade off is in the cost of the die sets. Besides Assmann, there were a large number of RZM approved companies that made astronomical quantities of reasonably high quality small stamped metal items. So I think that it�s a fair assumption that there was not a significant shortage (if any) of tool and die makers in the prewar period to create die sets. FP

Image # 2.

3 September, 2007

Craig,

I am aware of your two current submissions: one on the 2nd September, 2007, to the NSKK thread (where this reply appears); and the other as private e-mail to myself. As both submissions contain different statements, it is getting complex in dealing with the dichotomy of the correspondence, so I am going to combine the two - into one, and answer both of them concisely.

You state that I have called you a �loser� in public - well it is true! I have called you that, perhaps it is a trifle harsh - but I cannot deny that I stated it. Of course, if good standards had prevailed I would not have said it, so I suppose I should apologise. It is odd though, as my main adversary you do not seem to think that you have uttered comments for which you should give apology. Yet for several months now you have hounded me, tried to coerce me into debates in which I did not really wish to take part, referred to me obliquely as a coward, and generally made references to suggest that my knowledge is sub-standard and that only you know the final truths.

Well, I cannot be bothered to respond to such vague accusations. I have said everything that I want to say on this thread - and anybody who wants to check it and question it can do so.

I must confess that I have learned a tremendous amount from this site. It is a great arena for revelations. For example - I never realised that the OKH Honour Prize Sword bore a Wehrmacht Acceptance stamp. It was surprising at first, but then other commentary, and photographs, gave me reason to believe it. I am grateful to Bob Johns (Damast) and the Frogprinz for the images which gave me (in my opinion) fairly convincing evidence that this Acceptance Mark was correct in this circumstance. I do not mind receiving erudite correction - it is one way of learning new things. The other comment I would make is this; That if I make an observation that is proved to be wrong, then it is not post hoc, ergo propter hoc - to mean that if one assessment is wrong then all other assessments are wrong. Everybody makes some small mistakes, but it doesn�t mean that all their concepts have failed.

By the same rule of thumb, several years ago, when you visited me, I showed you all the information which suggested that the Huhnlein Honour Daggers were tampered with - including the information on the trademarks and the Gahr marking, but you rejected this totally out of hand. It was only when I revealed the same information on this site (Jason, kindly, provided some excellent photos), that other collectors and researchers (some of whom I do not know) confirmed the same information from their own independent sources. So I do thank them for their good spirit and kindness in making their own information available to the rest of us.

While you were away there were some harsh exchanges between myself and some other of your supporting members involved in this debate. We are not forcing each other to agree with the opposing point of view - only that we should consider it and form our own independent opinions.

I have offered the �hand of truce�, and I am pleased to say that one of your number - Gailen - has accepted it. I look forward to meeting him after around 20 years of spasmodic, postal communication. We will meet at the MAX for the first time.

I would be pleased if Houston, Jason, and yourself, saw fit to embrace the same idea.

Yours,

Frederick J. Stephens

I would like to Thank, Frederich Stephens ,Christopher Ailsby, and Fred Prinz for telling it like it is!

However, GRIP said what has needed to be said for sometime now....

"I believe that the dealer who started this thread has accomplished his goal,it started out as a discussion on the dagger,then after a while he invited Mr.Stephens to comment,knowing that he would eventually do so,and also knowing that Mr.Stephens held opposing views to him,thus a baiting would begin and it would end up in a farce,well it has.It would seem to me that a leopard can not change his spots,or at least once you have made your bed you have to lie in it,certain people have their opinions on this matter and they will not be moved,educated and respected opinions,to which they are entitled.Let the baiting stop,he achieved his goal,sad but true".

Sepp
GDC 0292 Gold

It would be nice if the remaining members of the "Top of the Food" chain" would have it in their hearts to embrace the Olive branch that Frederick has extended. After all - he was not the one who started it.

-wagner-

Wagner: With respect, I don't give a hoot who started it. Frankly, these debates predate you, so please refrain from making statements about which you are ignorant. In fairness to the other viewers and to Fred . . . I think it is good, as Wagner said, to exchange olive branches.

This topic was not about you, Fred, and it was never intended to be. It was about solving a particular problem in the hobby. Namely, that rumor (started by you) was circulating that the NSKK High Leader was a suspect piece. Given how rumors spread like wildfire in this field, and given that terms like "funeral daggers" and "billet clamps" seem impossible to stamp out, and given my belief in rigorous but friendly debate, definition of terms, I felt (and do feel) that this series of debates was both appropriate and needed. I was not in the minority in my belief.

For me, all of these threads we have clashed over during the past months have shown me that my opinions were in the majority, but not universal. Still, I freely admit that they may be entirely incorrect!

Anybody who believes in objective truth, and who makes an argument, must believe their conclusions to each be the right one. And when you are arguing "A or B" you can't have both - each conclusion is mutually exclusive. Fred: It's no secret than in these particular cases, I believe you to be entirely wrong in your conclusions, just as you believe me and the rest of us to be wrong in ours. However, I have repeatedly and explicitly made reference in every single thread to your intelligence, cleverness, and knowledge on many subjects. I have never once derided your general character, integrity, or mental condition! I was the one who was explicitly called a liar, a cheat, a and a loser. I do thank those who came to my defense. Fred: If you will point out to me statements I made which were similarly off-color, I will be glad to offer my apologies to you directly and publically.

Fred: I do accept your apology. And now for my part. Fred: you were quite willing to debate with me in private - extensively, so I believe it was fair for me to assume you had nothing to hide by debating in public. However, if your willingness to debate in private did not extend to a willingness to debate in public, than I misinterpreted your preferences, and for that, I apologize.

So, now we can all hopefully enjoy the MAX!

I don't think the offer of a truce was an apology. I have followed this thread with some interest and I think Fred was proposing a cessation of hostilities. I think I am correct in that assumption?

There are entirely too many "discoveries" for my personal collecting tastes of late. 'Cohones muy grande'..indeed!

Mark

Gee, Mark . . . "I suppose I should apologise" is what I read in the above post by Fred, and I'm trying to reply here. Throw me a bone?

I understand what you are trying to say Craig, but I think it was a different train of comment, not about the dagger itself.

I just personally think that this dagger is not one I would want to have to re-sell. That's really my only point. It (they) may or may not be good, but I like simpler more accepted items as you know from our extensive dealings.

Very good thread overall...excellent exchange of information.

Craig,

We are going over old ground, and I think that this repetition is fruitless.

I have offered a truce, and have done so publicly. It is up to my noble opposition to pick up on it.

Frederick J. Stephens

Again I must say I am not an expert in daggers, having said this and I must ask Craig to look at the touch marks, these tell us that there is a VERY SERRIOUS PROBLEM. Craig, let me have the piece and I will gladly have the stamps verrified. The hall marking WILL BE AUTHENTICATED BY THE APPROPRIATE BODIES. If the piece is correct, then all will be well, if not destruction will be the out come. As you are suree that these are original, then this way will be the proof that is needed. I will do this at my own expencess, so NO ONE CAN THINK THERE IS ANY ALLTERIAL MOTIVE. This test is what is avalable here in England and assosiated with Germany.

A problem could be seen as to the piece being given up. As surraty I will put up the German Order of the Dead. In the words of "UNCLE, A GOOD DOWN PAYMENT".

I hold no grudge here and I am not mad. It does upset me that many won't accept eyewitness testimony but that is their choice. Very unfortunate, IMO, but still, their choice. I have made my position clear, I know the eyewitnesses and I believe them.
I do wonder though--just WHO are these "appropriate bodies" who would decide if these marks are authentic?--and it seems to me that they are so "different" that at least a preliminary opinion could be obtained without sending the piece.

And if those "appropriate bodies" dont like the stampings the piece will be destroyed???
Or just the connectors?

Dear Housten, the relavent uthority, is The Goldsmiths Hall. I think this is enough said. This is the ultimated body for Silver and Gold. Your question, "a preliminary opinion could be obtained without sending the piece." This body has marked and seen over silver and Gold for the last 1000 year, give or take a year. They are the finnal abetrator. The piece will be tested viewed and marks evaluated. If right, provinance, if wrong , CORRECTLY DESTROYED.

By "appropriate bodies" he probably means an Assay office.
if the hallmarks are fake,and the chains are not 800 silver,they would be destroyed,nats

Sorry, not an assay office, this the Organisation that rules Silver and gold makers.It also has juristicktion over many other countries. Their records are the VERY BESR IN THE WORLD.

Well that's interesting but I would not be holding my breath waiting for the dagger to arrive for evaluation and possible destruction
So-back to square one. Opinion.

Craig

Not sure I see your point om "stamping out" terms used in descripions,You have used the Funeral Dagger term on your site

"Luftwaffe Dagger, Black Gripped Funeral Variant � #1041

Category � Archive � Daggers

I purchased this piece on my recent trip to Paris. Bought it at a very high-end antique market adjacent to the Louvre. Exterior grades PRISTINE MINT, with no flaws.

� Photos..

In fact, lacqueur is present on about 80% of the exterior, and has turned a slightly yellowish color. Grip is pristine, with no cracks or chips, and no traces of white paint anywhere. Blade shows ultra-minor age, with one tiny wave near the tip (it is almost imperceptible, but is present, and I don't wish to fix it - it does not detract its so small and fixable). In summary, a stunning example of this enigmatic piece. I say enigmatic, because it's not know if this piece had any specific function (thus the "Funeral" theory) or if Klaas merely got a deal on black trolon and painted the grips white to ship as standard Luftwaffe daggers. Whatever the function, these pieces are very rare, and commands the price, making it the most sought after "non etched" Luftwaffe dagger on the market."

Why did you use it if you didnt approve of the term.

WHY, all feel that the pieces are 100 per cent. This will prove the matter. Goldsmith Hall is the final abitrator in these maker marks. As stated before daggers are not my field. Silver and marks are. Thus, this is the ultimate test. One which one should embrace.

Goldsmiths Hall.The creme de la creme.
NOT an Assay Office Nats.
Cheers
Seiler (Yank in UK)

With respect Craig, I as most people and the police, usually do "give a hoot" who starts a "confrontation". Frederick was asking for a "truce" not an apology.

A very generous and excellent suggestion by Christopher!
You got to admit The Goldsmiths Hall is "THE" authority. Why not let them authenticate it?

And I will accept their findings.
What a great idea!!
In the true spirit of relic authentication. We should all embrace this rare opportunity...

Maybe just send the chain with scabbard?

-wagner-

I dont have the foggiest idea why everyone is so afraid to bring one of these pieces to the MAX,if its mine and in any question I would be HAPPY to have these services done,it would put it to rest for sure one way or the other,any logic that leads towrds the Contrary make me suspicious.

Despite efforts of the Toms of the world (who have some sort of long-ago seated grudge against me, and who would see me poked at at any and all opportunity), I do concur that a truce is in order. Fred apologied for some things, I apologized for some thing, and a truce seems to have been agreed upon by all parties.

I wonder . If the chain, scabbard and markings were found to be authentic by the "Mother of all experts" would the shift then be back to the signature? or the fit? or the leather? or the screws? or the motto gilding? Or? Peace Brothers See you all at the MAX!

No Grudge

You opened this particular can of worms now the Lid doesnt seem to fit anymore.Good luck.

TOM

IF, the chain, scabbard and markings prove to be authentic....I think that would be enough.
However, if they should not...well would we all not want to know? Or maybe some would not?
Christopher's generous offer to pay for the tests and leave a Very Rare Order as a deposit, shows a real willingness to settle the matter.
But we do need the same "willingness" from the side who says it's "good".
After all nobody has anything to hide here and we can all learn from this very important test from the real "experts" who have no interest in "trashing" anyones treasure and no financial interests in the item.
If it was my dagger and I was so convinced as some of you are here of it's 100% authenticity, I would WELCOME the opportunity to prove that the detractors are wrong. Especially if someone else was paying for the "Ultimate" test. That would be the Ultimate C.O.A.! And if for some reason it did turn out to be "bad", I don't think most of us would want it in our collection anyway.
We can ALL rise above this thing. Yes! Peace Brothers!
Is Jason going to bring the dagger to the MAX?

-wagner-

Any more bickering or insults or flames will earn the person some time off. Please read the code of conduct.

Dave

Although I have been honored to handle many of these, I have owned only one - the type with the nickel silver chain (although I would still gladly buy the solid silver chain if given the opportunity). I don't therefore have one to submit.

Wagner wrote ;

quote:

IF, the chain, scabbard and markings prove to be authentic....I think that would be enough.

I tought that the most important part on a dagger was the blade?

The nickel silver chain variant was stipulated to be one of the two proper configurations for the NSKK H�hnlein daggers. If a nickel silver example is being offered for a closer look this might be a good time to introduce photos of it to further the discussion. I�ve been having a problem identifying the alloy for the center mount. And been wondering if it is not more of a nickel silver alloy which would tie in a little better with nickel silver chains(?). FP

Houston, you stated:
----------------------------------
I wonder . If the chain, scabbard and markings were found to be authentic by the "Mother of all experts" would the shift then be back to the signature? or the fit? or the leather? or the screws? or the motto gilding? Or? Peace Brothers See you all at the MAX!
----------------------------------

You made a good point here, Houston, but the fact is that the signature was one of the FIRST points to attract my attention - and its' curious formation and construction added to my doubts that there was something wrong with it.

Naturally I recognise that even with each individual person, their rendition of their own signature is not always exactly the same. So the fact that the signature was "noticeably different" only made it "questionable" rather than being "self-evident proof" that it might be wrong. Of course, there is rather more to the "difference" in this signature than I am revealing to you right now - but the presentation of other, authentic, variation examples made it difficult to insist that my observation of "variance" with the signature pointed to something which I considered was questionable. So I have had to relax my presentation of this opinion until a better, more propitious, time.

The real break for me came when I had access to the Huhnlein example in the possession of Julian Milestone. It was then that I saw the cast examples of dubious hallmarks, and a "Gahr" marking that was all but illegible.

From that moment onwards, from my point of view, if the hallmarking was questionable, then the questionable features of the etched signature were worthy of closer scrutiny. Such scrutiny has presented an observed, and measurable impression that the signature has failings which cannot be ascribed to being simply "another variation". No - that etched "signature" has a defect which needs to be explained.

Returning back to other matters, particularly personality conflicts (where I called Craig a "loser", it was offensive and far below my usual standards), then I openly apologise and withdraw that comment.

If I have - deliberately or inadvertently - offended any one else; moderators/owners of this site, fellow collectors, observers, etc., with any crass comment or off-hand remark, then I do wish to make good and make amends, so that we can proceed into the future.

I am intending to be at the MAX this year, and have agreed to do a Q&A Session (Friday night, I believe, and I think that Ron W might be orchestrating this for me). So I hope to be meeting past friends and new friends, and in an atmosphere of cordiality.

So I hope that my return to your great country, and attendance at the MAX seminar, might be received with a plethora of interesting questions - and not a barrage of over-ripe tomatoes!

I will see you all there!

Frederick J. Stephens

Frederick wrote ;

quote:

So I hope that my return to your great country, and attendance at the MAX seminar, might be received with a plethora of interesting questions - and not a barrage of over-ripe tomatoes!

Frederick , what are your feelings about egs?

Hi Fred it will be my pleasure to extend a hearty "Canadian handshake" and thankyou to a respected author and gentleman whose books have saved me more money and have given me more insight than anyone else on this thread over the past 26 years of collecting. cheers Ryan Sellick

seleck8302 - thank you for your warm welcome.

Rob NL - what do I think about eggs? Well, I believe that it was Hermann Goring who said that: "You cannot make a good omelette, without breaking a few eggs." - so if it is OK by you, I will have my eggs scrambled!

See you at the party.

FJS

Ok , see you there!

As I said I might do above, I have removed some posts that were flat out insults or trolls or attempts to bait people. Sorry to have to do this.

Dave

Well I have bought most of my really good stuff from Craig and I have read Fred's book. I surely hope you guys shake this off and stay friends. It is healthy to have an occasionally passionate exchange of points of view. It is extremely enlightening to see the hard edge of both sides of the argument.

At the end of the day...so to speak...the daggers will all belong to some other collector and we will be DEAD.

I hope you all agree to disagree and have a beer.

Mark

Mark and I do go way back, and indeed - he's been a great customer. I've even saved him from a couple of really bad purchases. Mark: I hope to see you at MAX for a beer as well. Coincidentally, I had emailed Fred suggesting the very same thing - alcohol covers a multitude of sins! Out of curiosity, is it still permitted here to continue discussion on points that have not been covered? The reason is, I have found some interesting information on the meaning of Musterschutz in German Law (Registered Patent Design Protection), and would like to share it for comment by the membership.

Well, go on, Craig. Let us see what it is that you have to say.

FJS