NSKK dagger

[pitchen]

Hello, your opinions on the dagger ?
Thanks in advance !
Peter

[pitchen]

.

[pitchen]

..

[pitchen]

...

[pitchen]

,

[pitchen]

,,,,

[pitchen]

.....

[pitchen]

#####

[pitchen]

---

[pitchen]

...

[Serge M.]

Looks all original to me, including the blade buffer.

[Schlange]

IMO paint on scabbard looks strange.
Also on nut pommel are traces of pillars.
I wold like to see scabbard fitting on dagger lower crossguard without leather pad.


Schlange

http://www.mojalbum.com/schlange88/album

[saar]

The scabbard is messed up. The ring on the upper fitting was resoldered at some point and it clearly shows.

[Br. James]

Maybe it's my own lack of experience but I am not familiar with blade buffer pads on SA, NSKK or SS daggers. My lack of familiarity with this point caused me to look closer at other facets of this piece and I notice that the dagger appears to be an original, first-order piece, dating from the earliest dagger orders from late 1933/early 1934. It was made for an order from SA-Gruppe Hochland, according to the die stamp on the reverse lower crossguard, and all such early pieces came from the factories with brown anodized scabbards. This piece has a black scabbard, and that usually means that either the original owner of this dagger painted the scabbard black when the regs changed in 1935, or that the owner bought a new scabbard when the regs changed. I can't tell from the photos whether the scabbard body was hand-painted or factory-sprayed, or whether the scabbard fittings are solid nickel-silver or plated, but if plated then certainly this is a later scabbard than the dagger is.

None of this establishes that this is a parts piece, but these are questions in my mind. Cheers,

Br. James

[Serge M.]

The scabbard is messed up. The ring on the upper fitting was resoldered at some point and it clearly shows.

Saar, I missed that. Your correct, the ring looks resoldered.