Craig Gottlieb-SA Birdshead Dagger

[Frogprince]

This website states loud & clear that it was introduced in 1938/39

My thanks also to Josef Fueß for the link to the website he posted. Unfortunately, while the images there did not have closeups of the pommel to use for a good comparison. On at least one side the eagle not only looked off center, the left wing looked like it was made noticeably longer to try and compensate(?).

But it was with the closeup of the crossguard on the side with the Eickhorn treademark on the blade that I saw something perhaps even more interesting. Inside of the SA emblem I see what looks like three casting voids (“pockmarks”). With two being larger ones, and the third on the smaller side. But to put it in perspective, they did not look quite as large as the casting voids seen with post # 18 with the pommel of the “DAF-NSBO” version of the dagger.

PS: I know that some of the so-called "collecting community" thought that the pockmarks seen with the cast silver chain components of the "Hühnlein" NSKK daggers were perfectly acceptable as examples of high end TR era workmanship. Did this acceptance also extend to the "Eaglehead" daggers?? Or was it a case of just not looking closely at what they were buying or selling? FP

[Jo Rivett]

On at least one side the eagle not only looked off center, the left wing looked like it was made noticeably longer to try and compensate(?).

BIRD-FLU, that's a possible explanation. Another might be evolution. My findings concerning the other side of the pommel, clearly show a transformation from mammal to bird and then to Reptile (this would all have been possible in 1933, but imho not in 1938). Modern systematics (phylogenetic systematics or cladistics) define all groups by shared, derived characters, it is therefor not in the least bit insulting when i refer to this as the "Evolution-Dagger" Proof enough ?

[Serge M.]

edit: ► A question for Dagger collectors ◄
Surely you are all aware of the quality of SA daggers and High end items? why does the Hoheitsymbol look like a Pelican on crack, and why is it off center ? I agree with the Pakistani reference, not Pakistani-workshop though, Cave-man with primative tools.
Would such a miserable Bird be worthy of a Damast Blade ?

Well I always thought these to be original period rare artifacts. However I have never examined one personally 'in-hand'.
I have to state that at present with the evidence as clearly pointed out by Josef Fuess, in particular the Pommel on the Gottleib dagger, is off the charts to anything that I would find as 'acceptable' in a period 3rd Reich edged weapon. Even one that was for a standard issue let alone a special presentation piece.
On the other side of the coin; I yet can't condemn the whole type dagger yet as I see photographic evidence in books as in 'Coggy's example here that there seems to exhibit a pommel that does not shows the crude flaws as in the subject piece.

So was perhaps the Gottlieb dagger was also missing a pommel where one was hand made from photos and then finish matched to the body? Perhaps the dealer buyers didn't notice this stark discrepancy in the excitement of the 'moment of the find'.
However since it was disclosed that the dagger was totally restored and is stamped with the damast smiths logo...I would think that would be a important detail to photo display on a $70,000 to a potential buyer. Would it be possible to see that 'tang shot' ?

A great thread here. The hobby is a constant learning experience. Can't wait what info the Author of the book 'Reproduction?Recognition!' has to present on the topic, along with any other proof anyone has pro or con.

-wagner-

[Jo Rivett]

The Pommel

It helps sometimes to see things as they are, so after blending out the surroundings, here is a clean pic of the reverse, & Obverse of the pommel.

Maybe a kind soul can right click it, and post it here for all to see in case the link fails.

Now, can you help me out here, as i am having a very hard time seeing how any mockery of the Hoheitssymbol like this, could have even been considered for usage on a Presentation Dagger ?

Would anyone here have links to other, Genuine Daggers (Marine maybe) where the Hoheitssymbol is as warped as this one, with both sides looking very different.

[Frogprince]

It helps sometimes to see things as they are, so after blending out the surroundings, ............

Nice work with the side by side image. The gold finished example is also interesting, but the whole pommel I think has to be used because the casting voids are mostly on the edges.

This may have already been covered in the discussion, but not to my recollection, and I’m starting to get confused with all of the different explanations as to the reason for the dagger’s existence etc.

From Craig Gottlieb: “As one of the most elusive dagger types produced during the Third Reich period, this style dagger was a product of the Eickhorn company. Although little is known about the purpose of the dagger, it is assumed, based upon the 2 or 3 that are known to exist, that it was a style produced for presentation in a number of circumstances. To date, several examples in gold, bearing the SA rune on the quillion block, have surfaced, and one additional piece has surfaced with DAF/NSBO logos present. All bore damascus blades , and all bore raised gilted inscriptions (with one exception discovered by Tom Johnson) ..........”

From Ron Weinand: “I know where there is one of the originals in a German's hands........... They were the first Nazi Dagger given out in late 1933 to a handful of industrialists who were large contributors financially to the movement. The one I know of still has the original small chain link hanger. Each one I have seen or know of had an industrialist's name in an inscription on the blade. (BTW: I have not as yet seen it, so no judgment is being made.)

From Jim Atwood in his book titled: “Special SA presentation dagger”. Atwood goes on to name Dr. Ley, Herr Schumann, (Adolph) Hühnlein of the NSKK, SA Gruppenführer Knickman, other unnamed recipients, and shows a picture of a new looking dagger with the name of Kreisleiter/Mayor Vetter on the Damascus blade, which shows an Eickhorn trademark. And the eagle on the pommel has one short wing and one that is much longer in the 1965 published photo.

So how many of these daggers with deformed eagles are in existence?? FP

[Winston]

From the same source as FPs first quote -this on the NSBO :
"
The piece shatters the belief that the so-called "Birdshead SA" dagger was unique to the SA. Quite the contrary, this dagger reveals that although the few surviving examples of this pattern dagger were presented to members of the SA, the pattern was used for other presentation designs"

[Jo Rivett]

but the whole pommel I think has to be used ....

Until the owner uploads better pictures, here:

[Frogprince]

Thanks again for the closeup images!

PS: I’m quoting from the Müller letter transcript re: Jim Atwood in Tom Wittmann’s SS book: “These pieces included daggers from the SA, SS, and the army”. And Tom goes on to say about the two Mülller “SS prototype” daggers he used for his photo shoot: “.........(one crossguard) lacks quality about the bird head”. And the pommels: “Although the two pommel caps appear similar, it is doubtful that they were produced from the same mold”. FP

[Frogprince]

From the same source as FPs first quote -this on the NSBO :
"
The piece shatters the belief that the so-called "Birdshead SA" dagger was unique to the SA. Quite the contrary, this dagger reveals that although the few surviving examples of this pattern dagger were presented to members of the SA, the pattern was used for other presentation designs"

Ley was associated with the DAF. And Schumann was associated with the NSBO. And now we have an item that covers both bases simultaneously. Lucky them - now they can each have two "Birdshead" daggers. FP

[wolfeknives]

This pommel has ALL the marks of a lost wax casting. The waxes are formed by a soft mold created from a carving in an easily worked material. I can not see this as a die cast piece. All details and cuts are indicative of a relatively crude carving. A die sinker would use completely different cuts, and much better layout. Even cheap tinnies show fine detail in the die work. Did Eickhorn ever use lost wax casting? All presentation edged weapons in the Klingenmuseum in Solingen show exeptional workmanship, and very crisp lines. If the Solingen companies were hoping to promote themselves, would they produce these substandard daggers to be presented to people of importance?
Wolfgang

[cogwheel]

Are you absolutely sure that is the method they used? Or is this one of those cases where we base our judgment on someone's assumption? At this rate we will probably arrive at the conclusion that the pommel is made of brass painted lead. Its pretty clear where this is going.
We are looking at this pommel at about 10 power magnification where you see a lot of flaws. If it was made postwar why couldn't the fakers just take a stickpin eagle and solder it into the pommel? Thats what I would have done.

[Frogprince]

Lost wax is and was a viable option, with the issue being the heat involved using the technology they had back then. You could die cast zinc or aluminum, but for brass (or nickel silver) it takes a lot more heat. And if you you look at the level of detail with your average TR (or Imperial for that matter) Navy dagger there is no comparison. How many casting voids, or seriously deformed eagles do you see with the TR Navy daggers? And these were supposed to be deluxe presentation daggers with specially etched Damascus blades?? FP

[cogwheel]

We are still basing our assumptions on only one example. And this example has had a 'hard life'. There must be more of these daggers around to look at and determine if they all had the same problems. If they were all made postwar by the same casting method they should all show the same basic problems.

But there is yet another conundrum. The birdshead in my collection is a replica made in the 60s. It has a different pommel with the political eagle only on the obverse. Now, why would someone make a replica of a fantasy dagger that is made at around the same time and never existed before 1945?

Since the replica and the original 'fantasy dagger' only differ in small detail this would mean that both the original and the replica were made at the same time by the same people. And both were made with the same damascus blade and genuine ivory grip.

Furthermore, some of the critique by Mr. Fuess was directed at the dagger posted on Germandressdaggers.com. Well, those pictures depict my dagger which is, as I stated previously, a replica.

[F. J. Stephens]

That Birdshead

Has anyone noticed, that on Mr. Gottlieb's dagger - that it does NOT HAVE A TRADEMARK ! Yet Mr. Gottlieb assures us that it was made by Eickhorn - which what we have all been lead to believe.

The earliest source material for this dagger seems to be Atwood (1965); and as has been commented on earlier in this thread, a number of Third Reich big-wigs are alleged recipients - Robert Ley, Herr Schumann, NSKK Obergruppenfuhrer Huhnlein, SA Gruppenfuhrer Knickmann "and a few selected others". There do not appear to be many industrialists in this group - they are all political operatives. So the next question: Where did that information come from? How did Atwood find out about these names?

Another disturbing feature is the actual presentation inscription, which Atwood translates as:

"Party Comrade District Leader and Lord Mayor Vetter.
Schoenhoff, Major General (SS)"

Now I find it very curious that an SS Officer would present a Special Presentation SA dagger to a member of the NSDAP ! There would have to be rules to govern the awarding of such items, it could not be done in a private capacity - and I certainly do not believe that the SS had the authority to award SA daggers.

Another point observe on the Atwood photograph is that the two line inscription is supposed to be centred - yet the lower line is noticably off-centre to the left hand side. Now I don't care how many "real examples" of this off-centre feature can be shown to me in the "leading books" - but that is definitely bad workmanship. Unbecoming of a piece of this supposed quality.

I think that piece is a fake, and that Atwood deliberately fronted it in his book in order to legitimize it, and therefore leave the way open in order to introduce more of them into the unsuspecting and trusting collector market. And it is not the only item that he has done it with.

Frederick J. Stephens

NB - For some reason "Insert Image" is not allowing me to down-load the photo I wanted to place. Anyone in Europe willing to help me?

[Jo Rivett]

All presentation edged weapons in the Klingenmuseum in Solingen show exeptional workmanship, and very crisp lines. If the Solingen companies were hoping to promote themselves, would they produce these substandard daggers to be presented to people of importance?
Wolfgang

This is all we need to focus on. And answers any and all questions really.

We are still basing our assumptions on only one example. And this example has had a 'hard life'.

Cogwheel, , a few nicks, dings and smashes can be attributed to a Hard Life, but not die faults, flaws and two very different looking, ridiculous Birds.
One with a crotch, the other without, one stabbed to death, the other slashed to death and so on... in fact, everything is wrong with both birds from the tips of the wings to the wreath, which looks nothing like an wreath found on any TR item.
cogwheel, you said: "We are still basing our assumptions on only one example." don't forget that this is the only Silver SA dagger to ever be found, as per the Description, so it`s all we have to base our opinions on.
My opinion is based on decades of collecting NSDAP official badges and items, so when it comes to Party Eagles i know what i "should" be looking at, in this case i do, a lousy pommel cast in a wet sandpit by a drunk epileptic on a rainy day.

Maybe the angle at which the pommel was photographed has warped the birds? if the Owner could upload better, full face pictures this would help.

Consider: If a great shape SS dagger was found, that was made perfectly in all aspects, yet had the inscription Meine Ehere ist Treue... all we would need to focus on would be the word ist, and in this case, if you do not let yourself be Blinded by the "names" who are claiming this to be original, don't get blinded by the "name" who has written a COA for it, and concentrate solely on the pommel, you will see it for what it is.

Consider: As you can read on this forum over and over, with unique items, it is not our job to prove that they never existed during 1920-1945, but it is the owners job to prove that they did.