I've had the opportunity to handle a similar example at a show last Spring. I do not like the lack of detail of the eagle on the crossguard. IMHO, the crossguard is cast and, therefore, not original.
-
-
There are a number of sales documents shown in Johnson's Vol. VI (pgs 313 - 327), Vol. VII (pgs 238 - 255) and Vol. VIII (pgs 250 - 281).
One of the documents shows a sale of 10 Diplo daggers by Alcoso to WKC in June of 1940.Comment
-
Cog,
Very interesting tidbit, I have the entire set of old Johnson books & still find new items in them from time to time. Never noticed that before, many thanks for pointing it out.Comment
-
-
-
-
Greetings:
We also have a Horster GO Dagger. I have handled a great deal of German WWII Militaria, but not a GO Dagger by Horster.
This came out of a veteran's home, along with a red cross hewer.
We have taken the dagger apart for authentication. Everything looks good, with the exception of the crossguard, which appeared possibly suspicious to me.
But then, as I began to look at other Horster GO daggers which were known to be good, I began to feel as if the crossguard may be correct and okay.
Any thoughts / feedback? Thank you.
You can see the image files here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fzl4s471i...a7OMe7DXa?dl=0Comment
-
Centurionauc: No problem with the cross guard. It looks fine to me. However, there is a problem with the scabbard - it is for an army dagger.Comment
-
-
Comment
-
I think Barry Brown is referring to the GO posted by BobI. I was commenting on the GO referenced by CenturionAuc https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fzl4s471i...a7OMe7DXa?dl=0Comment
-
Grip placement panels is not in the accepted Horster style (see thread starter).
I'm with Manfred and Tom, adding the the numbers don't match.Comment
-
I see that now, I have opened the dropbox picture link and it is indeed an army scabbard . Thanks for pointing me in the right directionOriginally posted by cogwheel View Post
.
RegardsComment
-
Thank you all for your feedback. I really appreciate it.Comment
Comment