After thinking about the issue of an RZM piece with this much deviation in the grip to crossguard fit, I now think that it may be possible that the grip shown by mads is original. The posting of a similar dagger by Tor-Helge supports that. In reading the paper "SA Organization and Daggers in Gruppe Nordmark" by Dr. phil. Martin Schuster, he makes the following comments about late produced daggers:
"Measurements begin to deviate from the norms (crossguards are smaller,
grips shorter etc.). Metal parts may be of zinc pressure, malleable iron casting or aluminium. The ridge at the centre of the grip is clearly defined, the grips are machine-made."
The fact that the grip was machine made and not hand carved like the early daggers is significant. I can certainly see instances where there was not an exact fit, either because of the tolerances of the machine or the hastiness of the assembler. Besides, if the assembler was not hand-crafting the grip he would have far less personal pride invested in it. You can see on mads grip where the top of the grip was fitted by hand after machining to mate it to the upper crossguard.
"Measurements begin to deviate from the norms (crossguards are smaller,
grips shorter etc.). Metal parts may be of zinc pressure, malleable iron casting or aluminium. The ridge at the centre of the grip is clearly defined, the grips are machine-made."
The fact that the grip was machine made and not hand carved like the early daggers is significant. I can certainly see instances where there was not an exact fit, either because of the tolerances of the machine or the hastiness of the assembler. Besides, if the assembler was not hand-crafting the grip he would have far less personal pride invested in it. You can see on mads grip where the top of the grip was fitted by hand after machining to mate it to the upper crossguard.
Comment