I have only had this piece for a year or so, I rarely buy any dagger without maker mark, it's just personal preference but this piece caught my eye purely because of the condition, condition is the one trait I look for above all else, I have always thought this piece was produced by WKC, it certainly matches the other WKC maker marked pieces I have and seems to be a match for Herman's piece he posted, mine however has the fouled anchor etch and not the sailing ship, hence my question regarding the importance that Herman put on an unmarked sailing ship blade in his reply to my post, in my years of collecting I have not seen any other WKC unmarked etched Navy bladed dagger until this one if it is indeed deemed to be by WKC but just because I haven't seen another doesn't mean there are not at least a few out there, normally I would have congratulated Herman on finding such a rarity but knowing I had an unmarked piece and knowing that the 2nd Luft had not long been found I felt it necessary to comment on the possibility of an unscrupulous faker adding a possible spurious mark, it certainly goes in Herman's favour that he did not pay a premium for it but just because unmarked etched Navy blades are extremely rare does not preclude the possibility that the mark has been added to this blade, I can't imagine the reason somebody would pick on a Navy to do this but that chance in my eyes does exist and should not be ruled out. I have not heard of a Malsch catalouge, maybe James Brown has one, it would be interesting to see if a Navy was included, it would go a long way to adding authentication to this piece, I hope that one is found and it is deemed original but as I have said many times in the past, if the new owner is happy with it then that's fine with me, I have a few pieces that I'm sure would be called into question but I'm comfortable with them and that's all that matters. If you think this is or is not by WKC please feel free to comment either way.
