Governmental x Diplomatic daggers - BIG CONFUSION?

[Br. James]

ebj: "One more illustration worth considering is in "Swords of Hitler's Third Reich", Angolia, 1969, p. 272. It is an illustration from an Alcoso catalog showing their new Diplomat sword alongside a Diplomat dagger. It reflects the Die Klinge article previously mentioned and shows the sword eagle facing right and the dagger eagle facing left."

I'm sorry to say that I do not have this Angola title in my library, but I do have Angola's later volume entitled: "Swords of Germany 1900/1945," publisher by R. James Bender in 1988. This title may be Angolia's attempt to correct previously-published information which had turned out to be in error in his earlier volume. In this book Angolia has a short chapter titled "Diplomatic Corps (Diplomaten)," p. 270-273, though he does not include any reference in this book to the sword design for Government Officials. Under "Diplomatic Corps," Angolia states that "The eagle's head of the national emblem faced to its left." -- and this is the reason why I suggest that this volume from 1988 may be Angolia's attempt to correct the above impression that Diplomatic sword crossguard eagles faced to their right while Diplomatic dagger crossguard eagles faced to their left in his 1969 book.

Indeed, anyone reading Angolia's book from 1969 might easily assume that there was only one sword produced for BOTH the Diplomatic Corps and the Government Service. Of course, this impression was not corrected in his book from 1988 since it makes no reference to either the Diplomatic Corps dagger or to any of the sidearms of the Government Service.

In the chapter on "Diplomatic Corps" in his 1988 work, Angolia includes four photos -- two of the sword in wear, both of which are impossible to see the detail necessary to form any opinion -- and two of the sword from Alcoso catalogs, both of which clearly show that the crossguard eagle's head is facing toward it's left. At the chapter's end, Angolia states that the known manufacturers of the Diplomatic Corps sword were Eickhorn (Model #1795) and Alcoso (Model #1501).

Br. James

[ebj]

Thanks to you all for your interest and continued enlightenment regarding this subject. Sometimes there may be confusion regarding, for example, "facing left" and "facing to its left". The only clear statement regarding diplomat eagle head facing directions I have found is in the Die Klinge-May 1940, p. 122 article I referenced below. Some would say this article and the Eickhorn Kundendienst plate were both in error. However, they never seem to have been corrected in subsequent publications.

I am not aware of a GO sword. I and others have contacted Mr. Angolia requesting more details regarding the Alcoso catalog he references but to no avail. A complication when looking at photos is there is a point on the back of the Alcoso eagle head which can look like a beak, whereas the beak itself is quite blunt and "squarish".

Jill Halcomb cites several references to regulations in her book on the subject but does not present the texts and I have not been able to locate them. She and Jack Angloia differ on several aspects of Diplomat and GO daggers, hangers and colors.

[damasco]

And than you have the Alcoso Bayonet ? for diplomats.
Most if not all out in collections are fake but they did make them or one..
As there is still information yet to be publicized about diplomat daggers and GO daggers. Why would someone share it here .. When many already discount what is written in a period magazine on the edged blades they carried.. (Die Klinge)
You can study this for years but if you are looking at the same information sources nothing changes guys... (Already published reference, Internet searches, forum Experts, bias Authors ) you get the same information over and over...
There is other sources out there some are privately owned some are tucked away but you have to look and spend money and travel...
There is no free lunch guys... Good luck

[ebj]

One last thought...! There are Alcoso "Diplomat" daggers available with the crossguard eagles facing to their left which are not as common as those with the eagle heads facing to their right. Perhaps the answer lies with the number of TR Government Officials authorized to wear the dagger vs the number of Diplomats with the same authorization. I emailed a request for information regarding this to the present German government but received no reply.

By the way, the hangers for these daggers are much more difficult to come up with than the daggers! It took me quite awhile to find a set for my dagger.

[daggers]

One last thought...! There are Alcoso "Diplomat" daggers available with the crossguard eagles facing to their left which are not as common as those with the eagle heads facing to their right. Perhaps the answer lies with the number of TR Government Officials authorized to wear the dagger vs the number of Diplomats with the same authorization.

Hello ebj, that is for sure a major point for nowadays collectors (sorry, no documentary character). There are also much more "wearing" pics of gov officials than (true) diplomats which are VERY hard to find. Most "diplomat" wearing pics are gov officials when carefully checked.

Those pics (and written dedications, names, functions and so) proof also that eg. several postal officials or a Reichsbahn officials working in the east did wear the gov official uniform and did wear the gov dagger! So it is highly expectable (sorry no documentation) that there are a lot more gov daggers than diplomat´s daggers around what also does correspond with the mass of daggers in collection and for sale.

Greetings, daggers

[ebj]

Thanks, daggers. Just owning one of these fine daggers is a pleasure. Who knows - or really cares - with which TR government organization the owner served. That just adds to the mystery!

[ebj]

I have found an article in the 15.3.1940 edition of "Uniform-Markt", the monthly publication regarding uniform and dagger regulations, which clearly states the eagle head of the Diplomat dolch faces right, that of the Beamten dolch faces left. The 15.6.1940 edition states the eagle heads face in opposite directions.

This clears up the issue of which way the cross guard eagle heads face for me!

[Ron Weinand]

When von Ribbentrop's decorations and his personal trunk was obtained from the US Serviceman's relics at the end of the war, there was a photo made of the decorations and his dagger in the center. The photo shows a female military personnel sitting at the table. This photo has been published more than once.
What many collectors may not know is that the veteran sold the trunk with all items to a fellow collector in the 1960s. When the trunk was unpacked it was discovered that von Ribbentrop's personal dagger was an Eickhorn GO, NOT A DIPLOMATIC that was expected. Ribbentrop was THE top diplomat, so I believe
Eickhorn may have had the photo in the catalog, but I believe they never made one.

What makes this worse was the fact that since the dagger was nothing special, it was sold as a plain GO. Back then it wasn't important enough to leave the trunk intact, so his dagger was lost to time.

[damasco]

When von Ribbentrop's decorations and his personal trunk was obtained from the US Serviceman's relics at the end of the war, there was a photo made of the decorations and his dagger in the center. The photo shows a female military personnel sitting at the table. This photo has been published more than once.
What many collectors may not know is that the veteran sold the trunk with all items to a fellow collector in the 1960s. When the trunk was unpacked it was discovered that von Ribbentrop's personal dagger was an Eickhorn GO, NOT A DIPLOMATIC that was expected. Ribbentrop was THE top diplomat, so I believe
Eickhorn may have had the photo in the catalog, but I believe they never made one.

What makes this worse was the fact that since the dagger was nothing special, it was sold as a plain GO. Back then it wasn't important enough to leave the trunk intact, so his dagger was lost to time.

Just what I thought..

[ebj]

Just as today, there was obviously confusion at that time about the directions the cross guard eagle heads on the two daggers faced. Uniform-Markt was published for the benefit of the manufacturers and dealers. The 15.6.1940 issue makes reference to the 15.3.1940 issue descriptions and repeats that the heads face in opposite directions. This makes sense as the Diplomat cross guard eagle would face the same direction as the Diplomat degen eagle.

FYI: the 1.8.1942 issue presents the new Ostbeamten uniform and states that the dagger and hanger were planned for after the war. Period photos show these officials with Beamten-style hangers and daggers.

[damasco]

Just as today, there was obviously confusion at that time about the directions the cross guard eagle heads on the two daggers faced. Uniform-Markt was published for the benefit of the manufacturers and dealers. The 15.6.1940 issue makes reference to the 15.3.1940 issue descriptions and repeats that the heads face in opposite directions. This makes sense as the Diplomat cross guard eagle would face the same direction as the Diplomat degen eagle.

FYI: the 1.8.1942 issue presents the new Ostbeamten uniform and states that the dagger and hanger were planned for after the war. Period photos show these officials with Beamten-style hangers and daggers.

Correct this is known and can be easily found as reprints and digital files of Uniform Markt are available for long time....... This is not the full story of these daggers..
look for information before these dates you have listed.. As it is out there (but not on the internet..)

[damasco]

Reference, investment in Reference and research material .

[ebj]

damasco.

Please enlighten me as to the full story of these daggers. I assume you are referring to the Ostbeamten dagger and hangers and are familiar with the information you say is "out there." Name of publication and dates will be helpful.

[Br. James]

"I have found an article in the 15.3.1940 edition of "Uniform-Markt", the monthly publication regarding uniform and dagger regulations, which clearly states the eagle head of the Diplomat dolch faces right, that of the Beamten dolch faces left. The 15.6.1940 edition states the eagle heads face in opposite directions. This clears up the issue of which way the cross guard eagle heads face for me!"

Thanks for this periodical reference, ebj, and I only wish the answer was as simple as this quote appears to be. What is missing is the differentiation between the eagle's head facing toward it's own right/left, or whether this means that the eagle's head is facing to the viewer's right/left. And that differentiation makes all the difference, especially since the periodical reference is not provided together with either photos or sketches of the way each eagle is expected to face.

Br. James

[ebj]

IMO you then have to question the "Die Klinge" article on the new Diplomat dagger which specifically states "...whose the eagle faces to the left." Which is right? See Johnson volume 2, p. 88. The same argument can be applied here. We then have to deal with the theory of whether the negatives for the daggers were reversed in the Eickhorn Kundendienst, which is accepted also. To do that, we are talking about the direction viewed by the observer.

I have discussed this with both Tom Johnson and Tom Wittmann over the years. Since there are many more GO than Diplomat daggers, the right facing eagle head seems to make sense.

I remember seeing discussion regarding which way TR eagle heads should face with different applications in one of the UM issues. I will check this out.