Portepee in auction

[DALE ELLIS]

Ostmaerker, when you say dagger are you referring to the bayonet type or an actual diplomatic dress dagger? Also was the "private home" that of a fellow collector or veteran? Thanks Dale

[marisca lrommel]

I continue with my idea ... as long as I do not see a vintage photograph with this portpee or any document that shows me that it was intended for diplomatic personnel, I will not believe it ...

The fact that he was mounted on a diplomatic dagger does not prove anything ... look at this picture ... it's a diplomatic dagger with pendants from the heer ... just why would you ensure that those hangers were made for diplomats?

Someone could mount this portpee because he did not have a diplomat, due to ignorance or any other reason

[Ostmaerker]

Ostmaerker, when you say dagger are you referring to the bayonet type or an actual diplomatic dress dagger? Also was the "private home" that of a fellow collector or veteran? Thanks Dale

Hi Dale!

No, it was on a standard diplomatic dagger.
shown in the picture below.

And I bought it out of the home of the grandson of the person, who wore this dagger.

Ostmaerker

[daggers]

The fact that he was mounted on a diplomatic dagger does not prove anything ... look at this picture ... it's a diplomatic dagger with pendants from the heer ... just why would you ensure that those hangers were made for diplomats?

Someone could mount this portpee because he did not have a diplomat, due to ignorance or any other reason

Heer hangers on gov daggers are a totally other field of discussion. I do collect "wearing" pics and do own now between 1700 and 1800, from time to time I do come over gov men with heer hangers. From one man I have more photograph series: he has been an army lieutenant and therefore had an army dagger with hangers. When he (obviously) bought his gov dagger (proud of) he did not spend extra money on the nealy same lookig hangers but decided to wear the gov dagger with the army hangers. When you have a mass of wearing pics you can sometimes retrace such anomalies.



And, marisca lrommel, "Someone could mount this portpee because he did not have a diplomat, due to ignorance or any other reason" so what portepee do we have here(???) and why is the exact one described in the PERIOD REGULATION as lower ranks diplomat portepee and did appear two different times (two different portepees) on a diplomat´s dagger.?


Greetings, daggers.

[Serge M.]

My friend bought the portepee to a very high price, which shows, that other people also knew the rarity of this piece.

So this porteppe was on a diplomats dagger, which has never been out of hand of the family. Of course I still have the dagger, but without the portepee, which was original to it.

Ostmaerker

Ostmaerker, Great Story and thanks for sharing this experience with the crowd here.
Many don't know about these rare variant accouterments, as they are rarely seen. Not everything is in a book or in period photos.

The guys that do know don't usually want to share their knowledge with those that don't, as they don't want the competition when one should turn up.
The few guys that truly know go into a bidding war, one exits victorious and that was clearly demonstrated here. While the rest think 'Wow! That was some crazy bidding for some Railroad Knot that probably was fake'.

No matter how long someone is in this fascinating hobby we never stop learning as there is always something more to expand of knowledge base. This experience is a prime example.

Congratulation on acquiring that beauty of a early Diplomatic dagger.

-Serge

[marisca lrommel]

I only say that in any regulation or publication of the time speaks or illustrates the diplomatic dagger or the government dagger with this type of portpee. The Germans were very strict with the regulation, especially when it is referred to representatives of the Government .... I'm sorry ... it does not convince me ... it's not the first time that I see original material being sold by their hereditary relatives with accoutrements that have nothing to do with the material sold because, as a colleague of this forum indicates, he did not want to acquire another portpee and put another one that he had at home or could get in any market.

[Billy G]

Ostmaerker,

Beautiful example of a Diplomatic service dagger, it's got rarity and condition.

[sb98]

... so what portepee do we have here(???) and why is the exact one described in the PERIOD REGULATION as lower ranks diplomat portepee and did appear two different times (two different portepees) on a diplomat´s dagger.?


Greetings, daggers.

I've been following this thread and some people say there is no period evidence for this Portepee and you say emphatically that it is described in period regulations. Please post a copy of the regulation, period evidence like that would go a long way toward solving the mystery.

[marisca lrommel]

This says the ordinances for ALL the officials, without distinction of categories with respect to the dagger (REICHSGESSETZBLATT 12 MARCH 1940, page 467 "Reception of the Minister of the Interior of the Reich on the uniform by Order of the Führer and Chancellor for the officials"):


"3. Dagger:

Handle with head of Eagle in the upper part of the handle, with celluloid scales, guard with eagle and national emblem, with silver bath that is inserted in a sheath also of silver; Braided cord of silver color (portepee). The dagger will be worn on the outside of the jacket or coat on one side with internal mesh across the neck or with a fabric strip and internal metal ring inside the jacket and coat where a suspender will be attached."

[daggers]

I've been following this thread and some people say there is no period evidence for this Portepee and you say emphatically that it is described in period regulations. Please post a copy of the regulation, period evidence like that would go a long way toward solving the mystery.

Hello, see posting #8.
Greetings, daggers.

[marisca lrommel]

Hello, see posting #8.
Greetings, daggers.

Please tell us where is that publication 8, that we are very clumsy ... I at least do not know what it refers to ..:confuso:

[sb98]

(sorry double post)

[sb98]

Hello, see posting #8.
Greetings, daggers.

Sorry, I don't have the book. Can you cite the actual regulation?