RZM 1211/39 SS Is this dagger original ?

[Dave NZ]

Hello Everyone,

I am looking at purchasing my first SS dagger and I would really appreciate the opinions of the members of this forum on this particular example of an RZM EM's dagger.

It looks like a nice example, but I will leave it to the members who are more knowledgeable than myself to comment.

I know that this is a commonly faked model, so I am always suspicious.

These are all of the pictures that I currently have.

Many Thanks,
Dave.

[Rich Moran]

The etch does not look correct to me. I've been wrong on these things before but the etch seems to be missing the depth or blackening throughout the letters.

Here are 2 known original examples to compare the etch on the dagger you posted. The 1st top images of this post are images of a dagger I am not certain of originality but was supposed a bring back by a WWII vet:

This SS Dagger was part of a grouping of items obtained by a US Engineer in the airborne glider landings of 1944. Produced around 1938 this piece exhibits the RZM Code 1211/39 which is a contract marking for the concern of Ernst Pack & Son . These later production examples of the model 1933 enlisted man,s dagger lake the production quality of the early models . | German Dagger Buyers

The slanted images are of the front and obverse of the same dagger. That was sold by Ulric of England

The bottom 2 images horizontal are of the same dagger.

That was sold by Oakleaf militaria.

Notice the freckling difference in the etchings itself, the same depth of blackening too. Missing the freckling and non uniformity of etch depth is a concern.

[Dave NZ]

Hi Rich,

Thank you very much for your comments and for the comparison pictures.
I can absolutely see the difference in the etching that you mention.

I also note that the lower cross guard on the example that I posted is stamped II
Can you confirm that a contract marked dagger would be marked in this way?

Regards,
Dave.

[Rich Moran]

Dave, can't say I like the cross guard stamping, it looks like a fudged up capital I or a 1. I do not see a second I impression either, just a lightly dented line.

I think the blade you posted is a laser etched copy but as stated, and hopefully, others will reply.

I was thinking after posting the images in my last post that perhaps the blade and it's motto is over polished, as I see no cross graining on the blade either.

Hard deciphering what it is all about from the image's you'd posted.

Glad you can see the difference with the etching in images posted, as acid etching leaves a freckling finger print behind.

I copied part of the etching the blade you posted, notice the 2 humps on the right side of the German letter ß in Heist. Not certain what that's all about either.

[Dave NZ]

Rich, I agree, those humps definitely don't look right when I compare with the pictures that you posted.

I wonder if the dagger was disassembled, if we would see a hole drilled through the tang, because this example is really not looking good based on the points that you have mentioned.

Thank you very much for your help with this.

[Dave NZ]

Interestingly, I took a couple of pictures of the etching on an original RZM marked SA Dagger that I own and the etching has the same freckling as the etching in the pictures posted above of a genuine SS Dagger, so I am happy that my SA dagger is good.

I have certainly learned to look very closely at the etching before considering any future purchases.

[Dave NZ]

[Tim030]

I agree with rich. I think etch is Lazer. Also should not be district marked for a 39 rzm dagger made by E.P. & S.
Plus like rich said cross guard can't decide if it is district Munich or Dresden. I believe by 39 would be switched over to nickle plated scabbard and guards. I don't see any flaking and no patina. Looks new. That worries me.

Tim

[Rich Moran]

Interestingly, I took a couple of pictures of the etching on an original RZM marked SA Dagger that I own and the etching has the same freckling as the etching in the pictures posted above of a genuine SS Dagger, so I am happy that my SA dagger is good.

I have certainly learned to look very closely at the etching before considering any future purchases.

Not only what you stated Dave but the uniformity of the depth of the letter darkening on your SA is quite different than what the SS dagger shows. As it has been stated prior, the devil is in the details.

I know links are frowned upon, but this provides good information on daggers with etchings:

The Early Model 1933 SS Dagger

Have a great day!

[Larry C]

Heres my 2 cents ...Hello Dave NZ welcome to the forum.

IMO parts dagger ..Im seeing an early lower guard that resembles a Boker guard having that curvature on the off ends of the guard.
I agree with Rich as well that I dont see a Roman Numeral II which is only designated for early Production daggers and Numeral II was a Dresden distribution point.

I would also like to see if you could get clearer photos of the motto and RZM number ...the photos are fuzzy to either give a thumbs up or down. Remember one thing..your wallet is on the fence ...and in the case of the many concerns being pointed out..its best to tip your wallet back in your pocket until greater photos can be afforded...you dont want to find out later you got a doctored dagger.

The Scabbard is mid to late period.

@ Rich..the 2 humps on the side of the letter H appears to be from a used template and may have leaked over onto the blade....but...lets see greater photos to prove which way this blade will go ...if you can not get greater photos....For myself ...walk away !...Im not an impulse buyer with accepting uncertainty because I want an SS dagger quickly.

Get photos please

Best Larry