Deutsches Jungvolk knife - real or fantasy?

[Frogprince]

The “Party Day” types I’ve been told made their first appearance on the West Coast (USA) circa early 1970’s............

I came across some old notes that puts the (BDM - DJ) "Party Day" knives into the 1980's as to when they made their appearance in the 'collector's market'. Which is probably a better indicator than my offhand recollection of the timeline. In any case, they have been around for decades going into and out of collections - and periodically coming up for sale as the "real" article. That some notable long time individuals in TR collecting have been well aware of, and shared their knowledge. Fred

[Garry M.]

While not entering the debate on these knives, this, to me, is a somewhat dangerous attitude for the collecting community as a whole. Anyone can say something is bad, as it requires no proof what so ever. If I ever get tired of my collection, I can just claim everything I ever bought is bad and send it back for a refund. With the amount of debate these have spurred, it's obvious to me that there are dealers and collectors who believe these to be period original. Other's don't. Personally I would be very offended for someone to say I should be "outted and condemned" for selling something that at the time was accepted as original. There was a time that a ton of heartburn over flawed Knights Crosses caused similar outrage and condemnation. How long did we search for a photo of a retired pilot's badge in wear? Because the circumstantial evidence is against these, I probably would not want one for my collection. Still, with all the crooks selling proven bad items, I hate to see people put on trial for something they may have done in good faith.

I strongly disagree with this. We on this side of the debate are offering much more than circumstantial evidence of course but even if we were operating at that low level I submit that it would still be better than the flimsy anecdotal 'evidence' offered by those who brought these knives to market.

The 'BDM' and 'DJ' knives provoke discussion because certain people in the hobby many decades ago did not carry out due and diligent research when the knives were first encountered. They saw something for which they had no explanation, they invented a name for it and they sold it. A section of the collecting community accepted the knives based on nothing more than that. Where has this led? To a situation where those who are responsible for the confusion routinely ignore or disengage from discussion and instead leave it up to their customers to defend the knives.

In my opinion, those who brought these knives to market fully deserve to be 'outed and condemned' for failing at the most elementary level by not carrying out any meaningful and appropriate research and instead preferring to go with nothing more than their own opinion. Worse: they belittle and refuse to accept the evidence offered by those who HAVE carried out research. Let's be clear here; these knives were sold and are still being sold as an official, sanctioned part of the equipment of the DJ and BDM. There is NO evidence to support this.

To your comparison between discussion of the 'BDM' and 'DJ' knives and the Knights Cross: the knives were introduced to the market after the war and it cannot be shown that they existed during the TR period (and that they were introduced for the stated purpose). The Knights' Cross can, of course, be shown to have existed during the Third Reich period. There is no parallel here and therefore there can be no comparison between discussion of the knives and discussion of the Knights' Cross. For your comparison to be valid you would need to show that the knives existed during the TR and that they were introduced by the state for the purpose described by the dealers.

[Serge M.]

I strongly disagree with this. We on this side of the debate are offering much more than circumstantial evidence of course but even if we were operating at that low level I submit that it would still be better than the flimsy anecdotal 'evidence' offered by those who brought these knives to market.

The 'BDM' and 'DJ' knives provoke discussion because certain people in the hobby many decades ago did not carry out due and diligent research when the knives were first encountered. They saw something for which they had no explanation, they invented a name for it and they sold it. A section of the collecting community accepted the knives based on nothing more than that. Where has this led? To a situation where those who are responsible for the confusion routinely ignore or disengage from discussion and instead leave it up to their customers to defend the knives.

In my opinion, those who brought these knives to market fully deserve to be 'outed and condemned' for failing at the most elementary level by not carrying out any meaningful and appropriate research and instead preferring to go with nothing more than their own opinion. Worse: they belittle and refuse to accept the evidence offered by those who HAVE carried out research. Let's be clear here; these knives were sold and are still being sold as an official, sanctioned part of the equipment of the DJ and BDM. There is NO evidence to support this.

To your comparison between discussion of the 'BDM' and 'DJ' knives and the Knights Cross: the knives were introduced to the market after the war and it cannot be shown that they existed during the TR period (and that they were introduced for the stated purpose). The Knights' Cross can, of course, be shown to have existed during the Third Reich period. There is no parallel here and therefore there can be no comparison between discussion of the knives and discussion of the Knights' Cross. For your comparison to be valid you would need to show that the knives existed during the TR and that they were introduced by the state for the purpose described by the dealers.

Outstanding, well thought and delivered post.

-wagner-

[Mac 66]

Heres What a Genuine "DJ Knife" looks like

[inimicus]

amazing example thanks mac!

[Frogprince]

A very well said summation of the case against the “BDM” and “DJ” knives:

I strongly disagree with this. We on this side of the debate are offering much more than circumstantial evidence of course but even if we were operating at that low level I submit that it would still be better than the flimsy anecdotal 'evidence' offered by those who brought these knives to market.

The 'BDM' and 'DJ' knives provoke discussion because certain people in the hobby many decades ago did not carry out due and diligent research when the knives were first encountered. They saw something for which they had no explanation, they invented a name for it and they sold it. A section of the collecting community accepted the knives based on nothing more than that. Where has this led? To a situation where those who are responsible for the confusion routinely ignore or disengage from discussion and instead leave it up to their customers to defend the knives.

In my opinion, those who brought these knives to market fully deserve to be 'outed and condemned' for failing at the most elementary level by not carrying out any meaningful and appropriate research and instead preferring to go with nothing more than their own opinion. Worse: they belittle and refuse to accept the evidence offered by those who HAVE carried out research. Let's be clear here; these knives were sold and are still being sold as an official, sanctioned part of the equipment of the DJ and BDM. There is NO evidence to support this.

To your comparison between discussion of the 'BDM' and 'DJ' knives and the Knights Cross: the knives were introduced to the market after the war and it cannot be shown that they existed during the TR period (and that they were introduced for the stated purpose). The Knights' Cross can, of course, be shown to have existed during the Third Reich period. There is no parallel here and therefore there can be no comparison between discussion of the knives and discussion of the Knights' Cross. For your comparison to be valid you would need to show that the knives existed during the TR and that they were introduced by the state for the purpose described by the dealers.

I was thinking that during the discussion we might see some kind of argument to try and legitimize the supposedly period “HJ-Olympic” knives. Knives which are routinely advertised and sold for usually considerably more money than the “BDM” - “DJ” types. Here are two more, with the top one being one of the wood gripped types. And with the bottom one also showing the poor quality workmanship that is seen with so many of these knives.

Which to me is just another example of “putting lipstick on a pig” - to try and sell postwar junk as legitimate TR period artifacts. With the old adage still true: “But you know when you put lipstick on a pig, at the end of the day, it's still a pig." Fred

[juoneen]

Check page 69 for HJ fahrtenmesser production figures

http://wnlibrary.com/Portabel%20Docu...%20History.pdf

On the counter it is 76/185 but page 69 in the book. also covers other hj information. (20,000,000. )

I have seen a site selling the hj olympic knives , but can't verify if they were souvenir knives of the period or post war made.

I have german olympic buckle the same guy selling the olympic knives also says is original, but then buckle collectors doubt them also.

If you haven't read this old periodical, its worth the time.

[Garry M.]

With respect, that book is sketchy at best. More 'coffee table' than a publication from which one might extract anything useful for a serious debate. Full of errors and with no footnotes it pays little attention to how things changed over time, and why those changes happened. The inexperienced reader might be left with the impression that everything was like that from day 1 until the end. The knife section is of course woefully inadequate and of no use to this debate as it doesn't mention any of the knives under discussion here. You should be more concerned with the fact that none of those who support these knives and sell them are taking part in this thread.

[fredswiss]

Apparently Tom Wittman has come with proof that the DJ knife is from the TR time period. Here's a link to his update:

http://www.wwiidaggers.com/HYK.htm

[BobI]

It looks "extremely" legitimate to me! Since they are real I have defended these knives from the start. Since it was proposed we "out" those who brought these to market, I guess we can't collect anymore. Since, it would appear we have no proved these to be of 3rd Reich manufacture. Tom's bag looks as real as possibly can be!
Best Wishes,
Bob
PS- It always amazes me how so many respected people can vet purchase these and it is not considered credible.

[deeler1945]

I registered specifically to comment on this thread. I don't "do" forums as a rule and it's because of discussions like this one. Yes, the item under discussion is a relatively cheap knife with a very small appeal but this post isn't about the knife but rather what happens in countless threads like this one that are all examples of what is wrong with collecting. So. what do we have here?

1. People who believe in these knives (Jungvolk and the BDM).

2. People who don't believe in them

3. People who, I contend, have to believe in them because they bought one.

4. A sprinkling of dealers who, I contend, have to believe in them because they have sold them in the past (or plan to sell them) and are therefore compelled to perpetuate the idea that these knives are legitimate, Third Reich, items. If you believe what some commentators say, they do this to protect their reputations, to ensure a continuing market and to protect the financial investment made by customers who bought these knives in the past.

In this particular thread, Groups 1 and 3 perform badly because clearly, no one has researched the knives themselves. Members of these groups are for the most part totally reliant on what the dealers (and books by dealers) tell them and have told them in the past and they simply repeat that information.

Group 2 puts up the strongest performance because those in that group appear to have good access to primary sources or at the very least access to someone with such sources. As a consequence, Groups 1, 3 and 4 are eventually unable to respond to the vast majority of points raised by Group 2. Some members of 1, 3 and 4 resort to "ad hominem" sniping.

A member of Group 4 makes statements that are at odds with what he has said in the past and then disengages from the thread after being prompted to respond. It would appear from the comments that he does this routinely. Two other members of Group 4 incomprehensibly defend a further dealer even though it is clear that this dealer is wrong (the Eickhorn HJ).

So, the thread goes back and forward, eventually petering out. Suddenly, there is a revelation. A knife is offered for sale on a dealer's website. The proclamation of final proof for the period existence of the "Deutsches Jungvolk" knife is made. A member makes a post and revives the dormant thread and soon, a member of Group 4 arrives to claim victory. The evidence? The revelation? A humble paper bag; not though, the bag for a "Deutsches Jungvolk" knife but rather a bag for the standard HJ and DJ knife with some adhesive tape obscuring a part of the wording. Is that what confused him?

This truly is an embarrassment but will unfortunately change nothing. It should, but it won't because the deed has been done, the knives (insert some other contentious collectible here) have been sold and too many people have an interest in ensuring that the issue remains clouded.

[BobI]

I think you should look at Tom's site, this appears to be the kind of proof people have been searching for.
Bob

[Mac 66]

The paper Bag T.W has listed next to the bogus DJ knife is in my honest opinion for a early maker marked Artur Schüttelhofer hj knife with Asso trademark,

Not for an unmarked Bogus DJ Knife !


Does T.W think all our heads are zipped up the back ?

Matching this so called "DJ knife" up with an early hj knife bag is very deceiving Mr T. Wittmann.

[deeler1945]

I think you should look at Tom's site, this appears to be the kind of proof people have been searching for.
Bob

Hello,

Your use of the word "appears" suggests strongly that you lack specific, useful knowledge of these knives. I see that you are a dealer so therefore you fit perfectly into Group 4. As such, it might be said that you have a vested interest in seeing acceptance for Mr Wittman's proof . Please accept my apologies if I have misread you. May I ask what you see when you look at the bag and knife together in his photograph? What do you see as the great revelation when you compare that bag to other bags used by manufacturers to package the standard HJ/DJ knife?

The dealer mentioned by me in my first post (the dealer who obtained some of these knives from US veterans and who disenaged from discussion) is showing at the bottom of this page. He has been there for 17 minutes now and I would hope to see a response from him. Not a response to me but a general response to all who have taken part in this thread regarding Mr Wittman's revelation. Even if it is just a very short sentence I'm sure that it would be useful.

[Röhm1929]

What a truly excellent thread. A veritable microcosm. The clueless have no answers but have linked arms "Greenham Common" style while those with the access to the real and verifiable information are ignored. Isn't that collecting in a nutshell? Most amusing but quite sad at the same time. The dealers on this thread should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves but that ain't gonna happen is it chaps?