WOW! This is an outstanding piece!
-
Last edited by Larry Lipps; 12-20-2005, 03:29 PM. -
I didn't post this with the first postings b/c I couldn't find it.
I asked the owner to get me another cy of the letter BUT, as I told him, I'd probably find the first one before I got another one. I DID!
This item was appraised in 1999. Here is the letter:
Letter removed at owners requestComment
-
Lets see if this one is better and meets posting restrictions: The gentleman who did thr appraisal also purchased several other items from the owner of the sword and did actually have the sword in his possession to appraise it. Letter removed at owners request.Last edited by Marvin; 12-19-2005, 10:02 PM.Comment
-
-
-
The owner remains annonymous. He asked me to mediate any offers. I am no expert. We are aware that today the value far exceeds the 1999 estimate. An attorney will be used to finalize any accepted offer. Personal viewing is preferred. Personally, I wish wish wish wish wish I could be a buyer. This thing is worth more than all I own combined, including my collection!
I want to get more info on this thing before we try to market it.
Last edited by Marvin; 11-20-2005, 11:07 AM.Comment
-
Marvin,
You may want to post this on the E-Stand - I think this will get a little more traffic from potential buyers. You may want to check the rules as I'm not sure if WAF will allow a "best offer" type situation to sell an item. Give it a shot - your post may be deleted because it doesn't follow the "guidelines", but see what happens!
I am looking forward to watching the outcome of this sure-to-be "opera" of a find . . . .
Your NeighborComment
-
Marvin, unfortunately an item like this is going to have a fairly small list of potential buyers due to the price. The other concern is that as with any really high dollar item, they've been faked. I would suggest you have its authenticity verified by one of the big name guys like Tom Wittmann, Tom Johnson, or Bill Shea. Once you have authenticity verified and word gets around that it's for sale, generally those with the cash will seek you out.Ignored Due To Invisibility.Comment
-
Marvin, Larry offers some excellent advice on what if it checks out could be a very expensive sword. No offense intended, but many of the photos don’t show much in the way of detail. And because high grade fakes are not exactly unknown in this collecting field one or more close examinations by specialists would not hurt before trying to estimate a market value.
While the images of the blade are a little far away to try and tell anything - where I personally might have a little concern is that the pommel cap appears to be professionally engraved. But the engraving on the connecting back piece on the grip (from what I can see) seems to be a more amateurish in execution. I don’t know why that is - which is where a closeup personal examination comes into play. When you add in the fact that the scabbard looks like it was repainted with some other issues apparent it really does make sense (IMHO) to have a current appraisal of the sword. FPComment
-
Marvin, When I posted my initial impression of the sword I was on my way out for the day. When I got back I read the dollars only attorney’s letter appraisal (apparently based on general information from an unknown to me militaria collector) which did not provide any specifics which I thought that it might have. Then I looked at the sword again, and regrettably see some other problems with it.
While I also have issues with the sword’s construction: I took a look at the supposed provenance for the sword. As a gift from Heinrich Himmler to the leader of the SS Standarte 37 Ernst Kaltenbrunner.
Most interesting: Circa 1933 Kaltenbrunner was the Führer of Standarte 37. In 1934 he was briefly jailed in Austria but by the spring of 1935 was made the Leader of the (entire) Austrian SS. Arrested again in 1936, but was released on 1937 being appointed State Secretary for Security Matters on 11 March 1938 (after the annexation of Austria). He was then promoted again and made leader of the SS Oberabschnitt Donau before being promoted still again and appointed Higher SS and Police Leader to the governors of Vienna, Lower Danube, and Upper Danube with still later promotions etc. etc. etc. to follow.
SS Honor Swords did not even exist until 1936. At least parts of the sword appear to be from several years later. Why would Himmler award a supposedly custom made personalized sword to a man at his very junior rank when he was first starting out in the SS???
As the father of three sons myself for the sake of your friend I am very sorry. But I am afraid that he has been the victim of a postwar counterfeiter’s hoax. Most Respectfully, FPComment
-
Howdy! Yes, I am VERY aware of the dangers of 'fakes' being out there. The fact that I am NO expert or even CLOSE to one makes me more acutely aware of this. It would be a very welcome solicitation if a knowledgeable person near ohio would be interested in seeing the sword. I fully expected warnings about the potential for fraud and I cannot personnaly say one way or the other about it. I will see if I can contact Mr. Moses in Dayton, Ohio and see what he has to say about his dealings with this person, the other items he purchased, and his feelings about this sword. Thank you to EVERYONE who has replied and will reply. All comments are very welcome.Comment
-
I agree with the above.Originally posted by Frogprince
For all these reasons I have severe reservations about the authenticity of the etching and engraving.
Also:
* The sword is the so-called 'Paul Mueller Dachau Forge'-type, (distinctive runes button shape, no screw to front of scabbard fitting, etc. etc.) which would put it among the later production SS swords. The sword itself, which seems original, would have been made when Kaltenbrunner was already a General.
* Why would he engrave his name on the backstrap when it's plastered all over the blade?
* The formation of the blade etching etc. is just plain 'wrong'.
Many 'fantasy' items like this from the dagger field have been illustrated in Fred Stephen's book 'Reproduction Recognition'. I feel the Kalterbrunner stuff was added to this sword in the 1960s or early '70s. It would not have been cheap to convert, but someone probably paid a lot of money for it back then, so the fakery would have been worthwhile.Comment
-
In view of the comments above, it surprises me that Bob Moses has vouched for it's authenticity. Bob is a long-time knowledgeable collector and a stand-up guy who has owned some fantastic items over the years. If he can be contacted, it would be interesting to hear any further comments he can make.Comment
-
Marvin,
This sword has many 'red flags' that need to be addressed before it can be considered an SS 'honor' sword. Yet alone worth the appraised value.
First lets deal with the blade.
The most easily reconizable feature is the damascus(?) blade. It looks to be an attempt at a large rose pattern rather than the Turkish pattern that Himmler comissioned Paul Muller for his presentation blades. Muller was on 'retainer' by a lifetime contract to the Reichsfuhrer SS as the sole damascus smith for the SS. This is well known and caused some friction with other damascus smiths at the time.
Even if the blade is genuine damascus, it has some problems as the damascus looks to be very coarse in texture with a deep etch. It is not of a high quality or beauty nor does it seem to have the depth of genuine damascus. The pictures are poor but I would wager that it is just an artificial etched two depth pattern rather than genuine damascus.
The etched dedication on the blade is very 'stout' in the caligraphy and the font used. It is neither graceful nor particularly well done for such a high award by a prominent Reich leader. The Himmler dedication stencil looks to be done with a blunt magic marker rather than by pen.
The hilt has some problems also. It lacks the step at the pommel and does not seem to have the moon and the crown 800 silver stamps to indicate a silver hilt that would be proper to a Himmler presentation degen.
The leather blade washer is not original in shape.
The SS rune disc in the grip has been played with at some point as evidenced by the quite precise 'chipping' around the runes. Possibly a police grip altered to accept the SS rune disc.
The band on the reverse of the grip looks flat as opposed to the generally gently domed one on the SS/Police style degen.
The scabbard has not been repainted as someone mentioned but looks to have been leather covered. ????????? What else needs to be said here.
All in all this degen has an abundance of 'custom' features that are not found on genuine presentaion degens. Too much 'bling bling' rather than the understated look that Himmler deemed appropriate for his black corps.
IMO this degen is a postwar put together.
TonyAn opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it.
"First ponder, then dare." von MoltkeComment
-
I think Robin Lumsden has given a good estimate for the time frame when this sword was probably put together. Every so often an “old school fake” which has been in a collection for years surfaces which seems to be the case here. Among his other observations I especially like his comment that the addition of Kaltenbrunner’s name to the backstrap was superfluous. Which to me is reminiscent of some other fakes that have extra swastikas or other markings added - to somehow try and “prove” that they are genuine period items.
I don’t know Mr. Moses and don’t know what he thought of the sword - but he did put a fairly high price tag on it which would seem to indicate that he thought it was real. Maybe he was having a bad day?
Tony has made some good observations and points out some of the other problems that I saw with the sword and some I did not and is very knowledgeable as regards Damascus blades. No offense intended towards Marvin, but the images did not help with that aspect of the sword and I would be interested in seeing more to try and determine if possibly it really is artificial Damascus, or just what it is, because the etch did look rather deep. Also a better look at the quality of the blade’s inscription for future reference. Where I might have a minor difference of opinion is that the scabbard looked to me like paint over pitting or fine ‘orange peel’ instead of leather (?). Perhaps Marvin can clarify which one it is inasmuch as he has examined it personally. FPComment
Comment