wehrmacht awards


Go Back   Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums > Wehrmacht Uniforms and Equipment > Daggers and Edged Weapons Forum

Daggers and Edged Weapons Forum This is the corner of the site where you can talk about daggers, bayonets, swords and knifes of the Wehrmacht and related organizations.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 02-21-2009, 09:42 AM   #16
Larry Lipps
Lifetime Member
 
Larry Lipps's Avatar
 
Larry Lipps is offline
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Texas Gulf Coast, USA
Posts: 3,507
Default

If its priced under 30K, an alarm should go off.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2009, 12:45 PM   #17
johnnyrocket
New Member
 
johnnyrocket's Avatar
 
johnnyrocket is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: OH/IN/NY/Tarpon Springs, FL
Posts: 44
Default

I've seen the originals with the top holding lug screw in a shape of a cross looking design.

Johnny R.

If original, about $30-50 thousand. About 10 officially recognize as the "real deal" FHH dagger in the world.

Last edited by johnnyrocket; 11-23-2009 at 12:54 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2009, 01:28 PM   #18
Ron Weinand
Association Member
 
Ron Weinand's Avatar
 
Ron Weinand is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Quincy, Illinois
Posts: 3,557
Default

The scabbard dot pattern is all wrong as well as other bad red flags.
Ron Weinand
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2009, 04:09 PM   #19
wags
Association Member
 
wags's Avatar
 
wags is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: out west
Posts: 2,396
Default

All dagger collectors no matter if your just starting or a veteran should have Frederick Stephens book "Reproduction?Recognition" on their shelf.
Although long out of print (1981) it has proven to have saved collectors from making costly mistakes. Frederick is currently working on a new updated edition.
As far this particular Feldherrhalle fake is concerned Mr. Stephens states:

on page 59, "The standard original dagger features no blade inscription other than the Alles fur Deutschland, and there is no record (as far as this author has been able to check) of Lutze ever awarding Feldherrnhalle daggers with his own personal dedication."

Also the Eickhorn logo is positioned the wrong way on the blade.

IMO, this example shows an actual fake 1970's dagger coupled with a newer
fake scabbard. A "parts" fake dagger if you will.

What the value of a "parts" fake.....don't know but it can't be much.

-wagner-

Last edited by wags; 11-23-2009 at 04:18 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2009, 04:51 PM   #20
rkhunter
Member
 
rkhunter's Avatar
 
rkhunter is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,297
Default

Wags is 100% correct in what he states! Mr. Stephens book "Reproduction? , Recognition" is a must have book for any serious TR dagger collector. This book saved me many times from being burned in the past!

Kai
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2009, 05:01 PM   #21
ErichS
Association Member
 
ErichS's Avatar
 
ErichS is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Nord Amerika
Posts: 6,035
Default

Originals also seem to have a pinkish Hugh to the scabbards.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-23-2009, 05:13 PM   #22
F. J. Stephens
Member
 
F. J. Stephens is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 184
Default

Gentlemen, you are correct, this dagger is one of the known fakes of FHH that have circulated since the 1970s. Ron Weinand made a comment about the "stippling" of the scabbard not being quite right. He is accurate. The patterning design of the dots on the scabbard is identifiable - almost like a "fingerprint" on the originals, and this copy (and others like it) do not have the same evident features.

There is no known case of Viktor Lutze having awarded any FHH dagger in his own right, the reason being that Lutze was not head of the Feldherrnalle. Lutze was commander in chief of all of the SA. The head of the FHH was Goring, so a Lutze dedicated piece seems to be impossible.

There are other differences with this dagger compared to an original, but I will not bore you with these details. Suffice to say that the piece is a good representative example, so long as it is understood that it is a copy item. It has a vaslue, but it should be measured in a few hundreds of dollars, rather than the many thousands of dollars that are so frequently asked for such copies.

FJS
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-12-2009, 05:12 AM   #23
cogwheel
Association Member
 
cogwheel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 657
Default

This is one TR dagger, and probably the only one, where the replica is of far superior quality compared to the original. The copies are made of brass while the originals were made of thin gauge aluminum. I Had the oportunity to examine an original FHH and I found it to be a highly overrated artifact. After all the hoopla I was deeply disappointed by its inferior and fragile construction, and the speciman I examined showed the damage that had occurred to its thin aluminum scabbard which easily dents showing bruising to its anodic finish. As a collector who appreciates nice daggers I would say that the average original FHH dagger would only represent a sore spot in any display. The $50K price tag is a joke for something that is best hidden under the table.
  Reply With Quote

Fhh
Old 12-12-2009, 05:34 AM   #24
Ron Weinand
Association Member
 
Ron Weinand's Avatar
 
Ron Weinand is offline
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Quincy, Illinois
Posts: 3,557
Default Fhh

Cogwheel is correct and I couldn't have said it better. However, Lutze's own Feldherrnhalle is one exception. Heavy, well made and a beautiful dagger that is what you would expect from one of these. If Lutze's was the first one of this type you ever saw, then it would be one of the best TR Daggers.
Why they made them so simple and cheap is beyond me.
Ron Weinand
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-12-2009, 04:16 PM   #25
carlos1
Member
 
carlos1 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: norway
Posts: 299
Default

I have been so lucky,to talk with one of the owners of an FHH dagger.I told him that it is a great dagger etc.
He told me that if i had it in hand,i would be disapointed.The blade looks like heer blade,the grips are plastic or light wood.
If it was in my hands,he said.I would be dissapointed.I am used to SA daggers,and the FHH would be like a "feather"in weight.

Thanks to the owner for this info
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-12-2009, 04:20 PM   #26
checkit
Association Member
 
checkit's Avatar
 
checkit is offline
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,614
Default

I know absolutely nothing about daggers, so help me out. Is the etched Eickhorn logo a clue? It looks fuzzy, with an incomplete letter "S"..
__________________
Regards

Don E. Wagner


  Reply With Quote

Old 12-12-2009, 04:26 PM   #27
carlos1
Member
 
carlos1 is offline
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: norway
Posts: 299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by checkit View Post
I know absolutely nothing about daggers, so help me out. Is the etched Eickhorn logo a clue? It looks fuzzy, with an incomplete letter "S"..
Quote:
Also the Eickhorn logo is positioned the wrong way on the blade.

There is a clue
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-21-2010, 08:19 AM   #28
Barnstormers
New Member
 
Barnstormers is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: England
Posts: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by F. J. Stephens View Post
Gentlemen, you are correct, this dagger is one of the known fakes of FHH that have circulated since the 1970s. Ron Weinand made a comment about the "stippling" of the scabbard not being quite right. He is accurate. The patterning design of the dots on the scabbard is identifiable - almost like a "fingerprint" on the originals, and this copy (and others like it) do not have the same evident features.

There is no known case of Viktor Lutze having awarded any FHH dagger in his own right, the reason being that Lutze was not head of the Feldherrnalle. Lutze was commander in chief of all of the SA. The head of the FHH was Goring, so a Lutze dedicated piece seems to be impossible.

There are other differences with this dagger compared to an original, but I will not bore you with these details. Suffice to say that the piece is a good representative example, so long as it is understood that it is a copy item. It has a vaslue, but it should be measured in a few hundreds of dollars, rather than the many thousands of dollars that are so frequently asked for such copies.

FJS
Dear Sir

In your book Edged weapons of the third reich 1933-45 on page 40 published by Almark (1972) you clearly show the lutze' personal dagger with damascus blade and steel fittings and the Eickhorn logo with the feet to the crossguard. There is debate in this forum as to which way the makers mark should be and whether all daggers are of Aluminium construction. Also all of the known post war daggers that I have seen have an even stippling, the one shown in this thread looks more like a fingerprint to me. Am I correct?

I also agree with you that there may be a possibility that lutze did award presentation daggers. With Goerring becoming head of the FH in Feb 1937. May there be a short period of time when these presentation pieces were issued. I would value your opinion on this.

Last edited by Barnstormers; 10-21-2010 at 08:37 AM.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-22-2010, 08:48 AM   #29
F. J. Stephens
Member
 
F. J. Stephens is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 184
Default

In response to Barnstormers’ question, relating to the positioning of the Eickhorn trademark, there does not appear to be a definitive explanation, so I can only offer a generalised opinion based on my personal observations. I would not include the Lutze presentation Feldherrnhalle dagger in this, because of the unique nature of the item. Similarly I would omit the Goring Wedding Sword (oval Eickhorn trademark, base towards the hilt) for the same reason – they are beyond the realm of normal accountability.
Starting with the 1938 Eickhorn sales catalogue, such pieces which are illustrated with the trademark being visible – all show the trademark to be “head up” towards the hilt. I have just done a random check of some Eickhorn pieces that I have around here, and can confirm that with the Luftwaffe Model 37, Army dagger Model 1935, TeNo (both hewer and dagger), standard Wehrmacht pattern dress bayonet, and a Fire Department sidearm – all have the Eickhorn trademark “head up” towards the hilt. The “standard production” Feldherrnhalle dagger – if I can use such an expression – shows the trademark as “head up”, as indeed does the extremely rare 1938 NSKK High Leader with the scroll pattern crossguard.
Conversely, my RAD hewer, early model with the small oval Eickhorn mark, is “head down” – facing towards the tip. Likewise my late style Eickhorn Navy dagger (model ’41 trademark with the stylised out line squirrel) is also “head down”. Every standard pattern Eickhorn SA, SS, NSKK, and NPEA dagger I have ever seen has the trademark shown as “head down”.
So there doesn’t appear to be any logic to which way round the trademark should be presented – it seems to have been left to the discretion of the manufacturer. For example, the early Eickhorn Police Bayonet, large oval trademark, is placed “head down”; whereas the E. u. F. Horster version of the same item has the trademark as stamped letters, and require the blade to be held horizontally to read the trademark (left to right), towards the hilt.
It will be interesting to see if there are any Eickhorn pieces which vary from these observations.
F. J. Stephens
  Reply With Quote

Feldherrenhalle maker mark
Old 10-25-2010, 10:19 AM   #30
Barnstormers
New Member
 
Barnstormers is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: England
Posts: 6
Default Feldherrenhalle maker mark

Dear Sir

Thankyou for your response, and for confirming my own observations of Eickhorn daggers. My own theory (and it is just that) regarding the Eickhorn sales catalogue showing a head to top logo is that it would not make sense to illustrate (draw) a makers mark which could not be read.

Interesting also that you are of the opinion that the top end presentation pieces fall outside of normal regulation. I agree with you on this. Do you feel that it is possible that the Aluminium daggers could be standard issue, and the presentation "lutze" daggers were made to a higher quality standard using nickel or nickel plated brass instead?

I realise that the dagger shown in this thread was considered to be a 60's/70's copy however I know that I am not alone in believing that the high standard of workmanship would indicate (not prove) that these are actually of pre 1945 construction.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump






vBulletin skins developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright Wehrmacht-Awards.com