Thank you Bob. I appreciate your input on this.
Thank you Bob. I appreciate your input on this.
These things pop up every so many years....sorry, but as has been said, these are well known fakes.
William
"Much that once was, is lost. For none now live who remember it."
how many did they make? why would Himmler want his name on it, what would he do to the theif that stole it
The Atwood dagger book was published in Germany ca. 1965, the v. Moellendorf pamphlet four years later. I own both of them from my early years. The Mueller/Dachau letter opener marvel is on p. 213 of the former work.
The book remains an attractive, if problematic one. I am anything other than a dagger expert, but this book has been with me for forty and more years.
Here are the refernces pointed out to me by the seller.
Thank you all for a very informative conversation!!
Very well said. Atwood fooled a lot of folks, with his misbegotten legacy documented in many "reference" books. Being repeated and expanded upon in book after book by "authorities" in the field. With the post Atwood versions also showing up in books, and eventually on to new owners who believed that they were purchasing legitimate period artifacts. Fred
When possible, we ask on this site for primary sources, not the least to work against the normal and natural tendency of others more or less to repeat what others say.
Last edited by Friedrich-Berthold; 08-20-2013 at 04:33 AM.
I'm not sure if this is what is being asked for but here are three links, one of which I believe still has pictures of the homemade supposedly "original documentation".
Craig Gottlieb-SA Birdshead Dagger - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
My fantasy "Birdshead" dagger pics. - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
SS High Leader Prototype Dagger - Anyone Ever Encountered One Before? Oldtimers? - Wehrmacht-Awards.com Militaria Forums
With one other piece which I think may be in one or more of the threads, but in any case is in Tom Wittman's "SS Book" as it regards correspondence re: Atwood and the creation of various blades. With the above threads just a sample of what has been discussed over the years. Fred
Thank you. My comment was not a criticism, but a commentary as an author and professional historian of the tendency to copy the Atwood book by others which you quite properly pointed out. Thank you for the links. A familiar story.
By primary sources, I mean actual documents from the III. Reich. Please see relevant posts in the SS area. Atwood did not include such primary documents in his book, although I am nostalgic for this period of my life a collector, i.e. the beginning, with its simplicity. Today everything is conflicted. Atwood also poured out fake peak caps, as many of you know.
Thanks, FB
PS if you look in some of the threads I have worked on elsewhere, it is obvious that Nazi regalia was faked prior to the III. Reich, in the III. Reich and thereafter. Atwood followed in the foot steps of others, in fact, who were at work long before he took up his effort with the rubble of Solingen.
That was the problem with the supposed TR period "Proof of the Matter". It was forged documentation that was not that well done with errors and an obvious intent to deceive. With one of complaints of a well known (U.S.) researcher in the third link being that the Atwood fakes have even permeated German/European websites that used Atwood as a primary source. Which I have to assume is because there are no TR period documents/resources to support their assumptions - so they used Atwood. Best Regards, Fred
Similar Threads
Bookmarks