Personalized SS Dagger Opinions

[Zete]

Hi All
I got this dagger a few weeks ago and since I have it I heard good and bad feedback and so many mixed opinions. Depending with who I talk will say something different

I attached a few pictures of this.
Please let me know what are your views
Thank You

[PeterM7]

It's amateurish work. Who ever decided to add their decorative skills to this dagger made a big mistake. The question is, was it the original owner or some biker in the 1970's. From my point of view I'd wonder why when Germany had excellent jewelers who could personalize beautiful engraved designs why you'd do it yourself and risk mockery? That's a bad job and more fitting of my biker friend of the '70's.

[Zete]

Thanks for your input yes you have a point. Would be good to know who's work is on the dagger
what confuses me is the engravings on the cross-guard doesn't look so professional but the scabbard SS sign and lines etc are quite equal and nicely done is not like the cross-guard. and the name on the blade again is completely different is engraved professionally because the depth of the engraving is the same everywhere the letters are the same size so not sure about the whole. Also the previous owner invested quite a bit of time in research because I got with the dagger about 70 pages of documents related to Otto Ditterich like copy of birth certificates, SS card, documents signed by him etc.

[Billy G]

The embellishments indeed look amateurish and not period. It wouldn't be for my collection.

[den70]

Perhaps my reasoning is wrong, but it is very difficult to speak on such a photo. We see amateur work on dagger parts and professional work on the blade. This is very strange for me. The owner spent the money for the inscription on the blade, and all the rest put to work as an apprentice. But this is not the main thing, I am confused by the direction of the inscription on the blade relative to the dagger. It is not done correctly, in the other direction. This fact also does not favor the originality of these inscriptions from my point of view. The directions of the inscription, especially not official, could be executed in different ways. But there were well-established rules; all the inscriptions that I believe were the originals were not so executed. I do not think it is a marriage or a mistake. It seems to me that the one who did it did not understand such things and now thanks to this we can identify it as a bad sign. If I'm wrong, let colleagues correct me.

[Br. James]

I'm sure there were amateur engravers in Germany prior to 1945, so the quality of the work on this piece does not distract me from the main question of whether a member of the SS would have been able to wear this dagger on his uniform in public during those years? While I can't say for certain, it seems to me that doing what was done to this piece would have been considered a desecration and the SS-Mann wearing it would have been at least disgraced, if not much worse...

It's impossible for me to believe that an SS Member would have been permitted to "personalize" and "decorate" his dagger in such a way -- if that were so, then we would have seen many pieces bearing all sorts of similar "artistic" engravings over the decades since 1945.

Br. James

[Cavalier]

The difference in quality between the work done on the scabbard vs the crossguards could be due to only straight lines being required on one and slight curves on the other. The lines on the underside of the crossguard look to be about the same quality as the ones on the scabbard. Unless those were added at the same time as the ones on the scabbard. And the markings on the crossguards another time.

[Serge M.]

This is vI am confused by the direction of the inscription on the blade relative to the dagger. It is not done correctly, in the other direction. This fact also does not favor the originality of these inscriptions from my point of view. The directions of the inscription, especially not official, could be executed in different ways. But there were well-established rules; all the inscriptions that I believe were the originals were not so executed. I do not think it is a marriage or a mistake. It seems to me that the one who did it did not understand such things and now thanks to this we can identify it as a bad sign. If I'm wrong, let colleagues correct me.

I agree with on Den on his observation on the direction of the placement of the blade dedication.

Usually they are meant to be read with one holding the dagger in their right hand.
Now add the clearly amateurish hilt and scabbard embellishments, a possible grip eagle replacement (note gouge in wood at eagles wing), a likely repainted scabbard and re-stained grip, with a strange bold numeric hanger impressions, this dagger would promptly be returned if I was to receive it after a 'in-hand' inspection.

That said, we all have our collection 'comfort levels' and this humped-up sled drops way outside of mine. That is JMO.

-Serge

[BobI]

The style of engraving just doesn't seem to be of German "taste" or style. That grip looks like is was probably re-dyed also meaning it could have been a SA grip previously but.... A "hands on" would help verify that.
Bob

[Zete]

Thanks for the opinions guys. It's really appreciated at least I know more about the dagger now. and the added "artwork"

[Frogprince]

We know that Himmler approved of and encouraged "individual artistic expression" by the men under his command. Just being factious - the provable evidence is that the multiple different sabers that were worn in the early years were replaced by a uniform less ornamental pattern, that was later expanded to the German Police. The blade's added inscription most likely added by a pantograph engraver such as those used by sports trophy businesses using a template, and adapted for straight lines. FP

[Br. James]

Many thanks, FP -- you confirm my thinking on this piece!

Cheers, my friend,

Br. James