UBB.threads Forums Edged Weapons German Sword & Miniatures Forum Presentation Sword to RK Winner

Here is an etched and presented sword that I was fortunate enough to own a while ago. I hope you enjoy the photos.

Another shot.

Another picture.

What is neat about this sword is that the owner and the collector who ended up with the sword back in the 1960s exchanged several letters, which were retained, along with other photographs, paperwork, etc. In one of the letters, the sword is mentioned!

A second page of the letter - please note that this could have been the 2nd page of another letter in the pile, as the date on the top of the page is different (could also have been a typo). I scanned these letters several years ago before I could read and speak passable German, and might have been the cause of the error myself!

Here is the portion of the letter where he describes how he got the sword:

You also asked how the sword originally came to be presented. One Sunday morning I was visited by the NSDAP Kreisleiter [Nazi party local administrative official] of Mannheim and a Kreisamtsleiter [head of the Kreisleiter�s office] as well as the city�s then Police President. After a brief speech, they presented the sword to me as a commemorative symbol and sign of their gratitude. We were joined by a number of officers on my staff for a drink and then the ceremony was over. That was the nature of the event, and no Gauleiter [Nazi party regional governor] or other senior state or party official nor any superior officer was present. There were unfortunately also no photos taken.

Of interest is that the capitlization of the noun "Verteidiger" (which translates defender) was challenged recently. As most of you know, nouns in German (both proper and improper) are capitailized. If any german speaker out there disagrees with the capitalization of this word on the sword, please let us know.

very nice piece of german history, sometimes sad such items are sitting now overseas.

I don't frequently review or contribute to the on-line forums, but I have been studying and collecting factory-etched 3rd Reich swords and daggers for 17+ years and feel compelled to address this particular discussion piece. Most folks don't know me, so I suppose my opinion carries little weight. Fair enough, but here it goes....

You mention that someone questioned the authenticity of the Wolf sword. Are you kidding? This piece is as good as it gets. First of all, the inscription is totally correct. In this case the word "Verteidiger" is used as the title "defender", referring specifically to Wolf. It SHOULD capitalized in German, as reflected on the blade. He was a Knight's Cross recipient for actions in France (taking out Allied tanks w/ his 88 guns), and was later in charge of Flak defenses around Mannheim (hence, "Defender of Airspace Mannheim").

I saw this piece in the late 1990s, when it was still in Howard Bayliss' collection (you show the letter to Howard from Wolf in your posting, so his identity is no longer a secret). You'll note that the letter from Wolf was written in the 1960s. Howard had further documentation directly from Wolf, all of which was clearly original and specifically noted that he remembered the sword and that it belonged to him during the war. I assume (pray) that the documentation is all still with the piece (for those of you who collect personalized pieces, I believe it is a moral obligation to maintain any existing documentation that accompanys such a piece; believe it or not I know of multiple sinful cases where people threw away research that had been gathered... but that's a discussion for another posting). I know collectors who saw this piece in the 1960s and 1970s. I can't believe that anyone would question the authenticity of the letters and documentation. But if someone is inclined toward that direction, isn't it a little absurd to think that someone would forge all this stuff and wait 30+ years to cash in. (And if they knew Howard I doubt they would question any of this in the first place.)

On top of this, the piece is a textbook Eickhorn presentation sword. I own two Eickhorn Luft presentation swords that fit this same pattern (and, yes, they are both 100% unquestionably real).

The only negative thing about this sword is that I didn't buy it when I had the opportunity. Stupid me. We all live and learn. It is a killer.

Thanks,
Bob Johns

Mr. Johns - thank you for your contribution. Fortunately, most of the documentation has NOT been separated from the sword, but unfortunately, I only copied a few of the documents I considered relevant at the time.

I leave it to the critic to mention all of his objections to this sword.

Craig, there is every letter in the right grammar on this sword.
I just double checked it, and there is no either way and only one way and all is right regarding the grammar.

best greetings,
Robert (the german citizen in the USA )

The jewel in most collectors�crowns. A piece like this is worth selling other pieces to get it, if your lucky enought to have the opportunity!

Bob Johns, would be great to read more postings from you on personalized pieces in particular!

For sure grammar is totally right in the etching.
Regards,

Now that the grammer, the structure of the sword, and the capitalization of the word Verteidiger is the only way to write this noun, have all been resolved, another criticism that was offered of this sword was that "the NSDAP do not give out Luftwaffe Swords, they give out NSDAP awards." I would love to hear comments. Obviously, they did give out at least ONE Luftwaffe sword, but do you in general agree or disagree with the notion that it is somehow "strange" for the NSDAP to give a Luftwaffe sword to a Luftwaffe General? I personally do not find it strange at all. If the recipient was an Army Officer, then yes, it would be strange. However, I have seen many cases where presented swords were given by people or organizations that had nothing to do with the type of dagger or sword awarded - such awards are usually "recipeint-centric."

Its definitely untrue that the NSDAP only gave out party awards. Further, it is a historical fact that the local NSDAP groups (Ortsgruppe der NSDAP) were very keen to get involved in celebrating Knights Cross awards of local sons, the death in combat of a local Knights Cross holder etc., independent of the branch of service. This presentation is not at all surprising in light of this. Hope others can shed more light.

I completely agree w/ Gustavo. I think it would have been totally normal for the NSDAP to present tokens of their appreciation to national war heros, whether they be Army, Luft, etc. Keep in mind that Wolf was a Knight's Cross recipient at the time of this award. Moreover, the NSDAP was not merely an organization, it was the political body of Germany. Why wouldn't they present these types of things??

In support of what Gustavo notes about the Ortsgruppe, pls see Wittmann's Luft book for an example of a damascus dagger presented by the "Ortsgruppe & Burgermeister" to an RK recipient from their town.

With regard presentation of honor awards across organizations, what about the special army daggers that were presented to folks like NSKK leader H�hnlein? Also, didn't Army General Dietl, "Hero of Narvik", receive a Navy honor dagger? I've seen pictures of him wearing it.

On top of all of this, I again point to the original documentation from Wolf himself that accompanies the piece. What more can you ask for?

Whoever owns this piece now should be very proud of it. I just wish it was me! It is historical and important.

P.S. Gustavo, thanks for the voice of encouragement about joining for forum more often. We'll see.

thx
bob

All looks good , but the "point" behind the " NSDAP" inscription is not common , or !?

All very good points - the hobby is filled with presented edged weapons from the NSDAP, from people who weren't even in the military (brothers, wives, etc). Good eye on the dot. Regarding this period after NSDAP, it appears to me as if the etcher believed it to be the end of a sentence. It looks as if the remainder of the inscription reads like the opening or closing saluation of a letter (Mannheim 20 April 1942). To me, the punctuation does seem rather cumbersome, but it is not cause for alarm in my book. Perhaps one of our native German speakers can comment on this.

Also, the guy who doubted the sword should be coming on here to tell us why this sword is fake - I invited him here to give us his reasons.

We're still waiting . . .

Very interesting reading these letters from '68.

Did they ever get around to swapping swords?
How I interpret the first letter, is that the sword originally belonging to Wolf was to be given back to him, in trade for a sword Wolf himself had bought.

I love documentation like this

Cheers,

Not to be the devil's advocate, but one thing in this thread keeps bothering me about this beautiful sword: The date is April 20, 1942 on the without question original blade and the paperwork, without question, is original. Now, what is very interesting (and maybe troubling to me) is the fact that the fittings are silver and not aluminum-which I would have expected. I guess it could be the photos, but it looks silver to me??
All the wartime Luft Swords from Eickhorn that I have ever seen that were presentations were Aluminum. Strange? You don't think some collector back in the day decided to rehilt the blade in the collector-preferred silver fittings do you?
Just wondering,
Ron Weinand
Weinand Militaria

Actually at a time frame that you would expected all aluminum, plated, and late metals utilized, I have always thought that when it came to the special items, that the companies dug deep out of a private reserve stash to manufacture a special dagger or sword. I've seen this on not only Luft pieces but also SA & SS daggers. No proof, just my opinion.

Mine is of a similar time frame (dated 1942) but an aluminium model... beautiful sword Craig.

Red

WOW............ look at that baby!

As far as I know nothing precluded makers from conserving or setting aside early manufacture parts be used in later production. By 1942 new production should have been using plated zinc fittings unless they had adequate stocks of previously manufactured parts on hand.

A 1942 manufactured aluminum mounted Fliegerschwert (crossover or not) is not too much of a stretch. But I think that first generation nickel silver mounts might be harder to justify, especially since same vintage presentation models also seem to be aluminum.

What I would like to know about is the �swap�. What was that all about?? FP

quote:

Originally posted by Fred Prinz (aka "Frogprince"):
What I would like to know about is the �swap�. What was that all about?? FP

THe last part of the first page of the letter is about this "swap".
I'll try to give a rough translation, my german is far from good

Translation:
That you have the wish to give the sword back (to me) gives me great pleasure, and it confirms that you are a knightly partner, a gentleman. I too also feel that the return can only be done with success personnally. So I look forward to your visit, and to learn to know you personnaly- I'd be grateful if you would let me know soon, about when you come to Germany.
So like you will not give my sword away for money, I will also not sell the sword that I now have, even though I myself had to buy it. We will swap (trade) the swords when you are here. A condition for the swap can not be set...

(and page 2 of the letter continues about this condition of a LW standarte also to be included in the trade.)

Hope this helps

I would love to know what sword Wolf was going to trade!!

Cheers

Thank You Tor-Helge !!

The translation does help, and the answer as to what specific swords were going to be traded it seems may be in the letters Howard Bayliss sent to General Wolf in conjunction with the letter(s) posted. Apparently Mr. Bayliss proposed a visit, and was going to �gift� him a sword in exchange for another that Wolf had purchased which also included a LW standarte.

Craig I think indicated that most (?) of the paperwork was with the sword, which I�m assuming also included letters from Bayliss to Wolf. Letters which could help clear up at least some of the mystery of what General Wolf was going to give in exchange. Did they ever have a face to face meet?

Best Regards, FP

Craig , that sword is a known FAKE....

Rob,

Please tell us more - a lot more - of why you say this.

Thanks
Dave

Hahaha , Dave , sorry couldnt help it , you guys are allways so serious ....
The sword is mine , and I know its not fake , I was just pulling one one Craig.
I will try to post all of the docs that belong to the sword, found them now , I recently moved .

So Frederick , here are the documents that you were waithing for .
Now can you explain to me why the sword is fake!
These are very serious things that you are saying .
This was a VERY expensive sword , and it cant be that you say a thing like this , and dont tell us why you think this.
I think that very much collectors here would want to hear your explanation.

2

3

4

5

6

7