Governmental x Diplomatic daggers - BIG CONFUSION?

[Luko]

Hello, can you explain me someone why nowadays (and decades ago) Governmental daggers has both heads to left side and Diplomatic daggers upper head left and lower (crossguards) to right side. You can see this description by all sellers.

If you look at period Eickhorn catalogue they described these daggers directly in the opposite way : Diplo daggers both eagles are looking to left side and Governmental daggers upper eagle is looking to left side, but lower (crossguards) is looking at right side.



Best, Lukas.

[Br. James]

I'll bet there's a very easy answer to this question: The person who was laying out the publishing details for this edition of the Eichkorn Catalog made an honest mistake, and no one caught it before it went to press! Even the Nazis were not always up to the level of their own propaganda!!

Br. James

[Luko]

Yes James, it could be. Do you have other Eick catalogue, which show this in the opposite way, than this one i posted?

Lukas.

[Br. James]

According to my inventory list, I do have an Eickhorn catalog from 1938...but I can't put my hands on it at this time! If I can find it, I'll respond further...sorry!

Br. James

[damasco]

According to my inventory list, I do have an Eickhorn catalog from 1938...but I can't put my hands on it at this time! If I can find it, I'll respond further...sorry!

Br. James

Does anyone have good pictures of Von Ribbon.. Dagger Showing crossguard??
Or any EARLY diplomats wearing daggers.. ... Showing crossguard...
Regards: James

[ebj]

See "In the Service of the Reich", Angolia, 1995, p. 137. His opinion, based on period Eickhorn, Holler and Alcoso catalogs and a period Die Klinge article, is the direction the crossguard eagle faces on GO and Diplo daggers depends on the manufacturer.

I have researched this for many years and tend to agree. Just my "two cents worth"!

[The Red Baron]

See "In the Service of the Reich", Angolia, 1995, p. 137. His opinion, based on period Eickhorn, Holler and Alcoso catalogs and a period Die Klinge article, is the direction the crossguard eagle faces on GO and Diplo daggers depends on the manufacturer.

I have researched this for many years and tend to agree. Just my "two cents worth"!

I agree! I think the fascination with GO/Diplo is collector-made. I doubt the wearers were cognizant of the difference.

[damasco]

See "In the Service of the Reich", Angolia, 1995, p. 137. His opinion, based on period Eickhorn, Holler and Alcoso catalogs and a period Die Klinge article, is the direction the crossguard eagle faces on GO and Diplo daggers depends on the manufacturer.

I have researched this for many years and tend to agree. Just my "two cents worth"!

I have the catalogs and the Die Klingen Magazine with the article in..
Yes Mr. Angolia is going in the right direction but since 1995 more period information has turned up that can debunk and reinforce some of what Mr. Angolia printed.
I have always enjoyed his books as I find them very accurate.
Regards: James

[Luko]

I agree! I think the fascination with GO/Diplo is collector-made. I doubt the wearers were cognizant of the difference.

Of course, i agree with this, that wearers did not care about such details. However at least in this Eick catalogues, they distinguish GO/DIPLO according to on which side the eagle is looking. So why they did this, if there would not be difference between them? My conclusion based just on this catalogue is, it is not collectors-made, because in fact they are two types and there must be some reason, why they made two types. I really doubt, they are doing them by the weather or they mood...

I could accept if e.g. Eick made left facing only and Alcoso right, BUT why at least Eick made both type of crossguards, if they would not make any difference.

[Br. James]

Dear Lukas,

I've found my copy of the Eickhorn 1938 catalog and it presents one page featuring the "Dolch für Diplomaten Nr. 1796" dagger, which includes the eagle at the crossguard with it's head facing to it's right; and one page featuring the "Dolch für Staatsbeamte Nr. 1791" dagger, which includes the eagle at the crossguard with it's head facing to it's left. Indeed, these two pages are identical with the two sets of pages you presented in your note #1 below; the only difference is that your pix do not show the full model numbers of the two different daggers being offered. But your two upper pix are of the same dagger, as are the two lower pix.

As originally noted, both of the daggers offered in the 1938 Eickhorn catalog are reversed in terms of the crossguard eagle from what we all have accepted as the standard difference between these two styles of daggers: The Diplomatic Corps dagger included a crossguard eagle which faced to it's left, and the Government Officials/State Service dagger included a crossguard eagle which faced to it's right. There is nothing in the 1938 catalog which would suggest that these two different dagger styles were interchangeable; each was clearly assigned to it's own area of uniformed governmental responsibility...the problem is that the photos were "flopped" when the catalog was published and the wrong photos were shown as representing each other's uniform style.

Many thanks for bringing this quirk to our attention! Cheers,

Br. James

[daggers]

Hello,
there are CLEAR PERIOD regulations, posted also for several times in the net(!), that the Dolch f. Staatsbeamte has a crossguard eagle facing to it´s right (=same direction as the pommel eagle) and the Dolch f. Diplomaten has a crossguard eagle facing to it´s left.
the pics in the EICKHORN catalog are erroneously interchanged.

Greetings, daggers.

[ebj]

Thanks to all for your comments. I have had numerous discussions with Tom Johnson and Tom Wittmann over the years regarding this subject. I have tried to contact Jack Angolia several times but with no success. The other related subjects are the colors of the daggers and the hangers. See, for example, Jill Halcomb's book, "Uniforms and Insignia...", pp. 121-126 and compare it to Angolia' books on the same subjects. They are clearly different.

I, nor my friends noted above, have located any clear period regulations addressing the above subjects. Halcomb references some, Angolia is more vague. I tend to hang my hat on the Die Klinge article referenced by Angolia in his book on TR Swords.

Please post copies of these clear period regulations for our benefit. Thanks!

[den70]

I have the catalogs and the Die Klingen Magazine with the article in..
Yes Mr. Angolia is going in the right direction but since 1995 more period information has turned up that can debunk and reinforce some of what Mr. Angolia printed.
I have always enjoyed his books as I find them very accurate.
Regards: James

James,
could you share the article from Die Klinge where it is stated that direction of crossguard eagle depends on the manufacturer? If no, please advise issue number and year.

Best regards Den.

[Luko]

Thanks all for good discusion. Can you please post these regulations and pictures of die Klinge magazine?

[damasco]

The klingen mag article will be in a reference being worked on now.. Part of a small series of books...
Regards: James