|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,126 Likes: 22
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 5,126 Likes: 22 |
A low number indeed and an oddity to be on a dagger issued years later. That’s said, could it have been a replacement for a dagger severely damaged or lost?
I say this because I once sourced an NPEA dagger that had a very low school number. The dagger however had all the hallmarks of a much later produced dagger but the number was a conundrum. The font was perfect too. I showed it to an advanced collector whose opinion I implicitly trust and the theory was that the dagger was a replacement.
I’d be curious to know what the inside of the crossguard looks like and whether the gunk is all consistent inside or is some missing to reflect recent stamping.
GDC Gold Badge #290 GDC Silver Badge #310
|
|
|
Forums42
Topics31,652
Posts328,702
Members7,501
|
Most Online5,900 Dec 19th, 2019
|
|
9 members (ANTIK-1933, Herman V. (aka Herr Mann), The_Collector, Documentalist, Jonesy, Jamesol2, Seppi, Vern, Paul),
489
guests, and
75
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|