I referenced as far as I could on the tang markings on this produced blade A&W or M&V which ever way it is viewed does not appear at all in any known reference. There is a possibility this may or may not be a sub contractor..and comparison with another Peres tang might prove otherwise. I am curious of that.
Also what is known to the internal crossguard stamping is that P&A was commonly seen with this maker...and no data supports unmarked crossguards for this producer. I can only assume since I have not seen the internal markings that they may be marked with a "dot"?
Yet nothing is impossible in this hobby as new information surfaces mainly from the Vets attic..which never had seen the light of day or the reference books.
P&A ..."Piel & Adey" for now,.. who were sub contracted and supplied crossguards to Peres.
A closers study in this thread SA Gruppe marks known to Dagger Producers and Manufacturers
will reveal current producers whose dagger the "Sw" Gruppe mark was applied to. Thankyou for your patience as the Christmas cheer I was drinking temporarily hindered further study into bringing you further information. ....I do have some of that Cheer left though Best Regards Larry
It is not the size of a Collection in History that matters......Its the size of your Passion for it!! - Larry C
One never knows what tree roots push to the surface of what laid buried before the tree was planted - Larry C
“The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.” - Winston Churchill
It looks from the pics that the spine of the blade in the central area was removed before that inscription was added .
We are the Pilgrims , master, we shall go
Always a little further : it may be
Beyond that last blue mountain barred with snow
Across that angry or that glimmering sea...
I think its a complete Frankenstein dagger.
That grip does not belong to a Peres dagger, misses the soft contours that those early Peres daggers have.
Its appeareance is not what i would like to see meeting a Peres.