The mystery continues, I suppose. No one is going to convince another of opposite thinking until period documentation or some other irrefutable source is brought forth. I remain on the side believing the Gau-marked M36's are authentic. I also own two "Type II" daggers, so I am not "beating the drum" for Gau-marked examples for personal reasons. I simply think the preponderance of evidence and common sense point to Gau-marked M36's being authentic. If they were "parts daggers," somebody got awfully lucky to find so many "Type I" scabbards, early grips, blades and crossguards to assemble them after the war ("Rats! We could only find Gau-marked lower guards!"). The only argument the "anti's" have in the face of numerous vet-acquired Gau-marked examples is they must be "parts daggers." Sorry, folks, it just doesn't wash, in view of the numbers, the quality, fit and finish, age, etc. If it weren't for the Gau-markings, few, if any, of these daggers would raise serious questions as to authenticity.
