- Joined
- Jun 12, 2009
- Messages
- 701
- Thanks Received
- 126
With the regulations stating that the motto was to be dis-continued on HJ knives from around August 1938, why do we see something like this?
This is not my knife but I present my thoughts here for your comment with the permission of the current owner. I am sure that the owner will make comment as well.
Initial thoughts are that it is most likely a post-war added motto or a complete fake but it is a very interesting knife, so lets look at it a little closer.
Here is the overall reverse view of the knife and scabbard. The blade is dated 1939 from WKC, clearly stamped with the maker and RZM mark as expected. There is some heavy cleaning to the blade, which can be seen. The scabbard has had a re-paint at some point. The reverse grip plates and rivets look good. The hilt is made of zinc, which shows through the worn plating as the blue coloured metal.
Now, let’s look at the obverse view of the knife and scabbard.
The motto looks to be etched quite strongly but it is not placed in the 'usual' position. It is placed closer to the tip of the blade than is normally seen. The plates and rivets look fine, and they are fitted very well to the hilt.
Looking at the larger sized, later diamond, it is well fitted to the plate. It looks as though the edges of the diamond are running parallel to the grip plate pattern but they aren’t if you look closely.
These pics show the damage to the hilt that is commonly seen on HJ knives where their original owners have used them most likely as a hammer on tent pegs or nails etc. So, based on all these factors, the knife itself does appear to be original.
Looking closer at the motto now, the only thing that really distinguishes it from other mottoed examples is its position on the blade.
When lined up with, and compared to another WKC mottoed example, there is very little, if any, difference in the formation, spacing and size of the lettering. See comparison here
Zooming in a little closer on the motto shows that it appears to be correctly acid etched, with the rough edges usually seen, not precise or smooth enough to be a photo-etched blade.
There are also some scratches on the blade, which appear to run through the motto etch as well.
So to me, the etch looks good, but is it original to the knife? We may never know but it certainly appears to be in my opinion after looking at all of these aspects. If it is a post war added motto, it has been done very well. But if so, why place it in an in-correct position? After going to all the trouble of producing a fine etch, why slip up on something so obvious?
I believe that if we saw this motto on an un-dated blade, we would accept it as original without too much thought, despite the in-correct position.
Sometimes we do see things that challenge our thoughts and what we know, and what we expect to see. Like the maker marked blades with an RZM number assigned to a different manufacturer for example.
I’d be interested in hearing what our fellow forum members think of this most interesting configuration.
And thanks Scott for providing me with the pics!
Regards
Russ
This is not my knife but I present my thoughts here for your comment with the permission of the current owner. I am sure that the owner will make comment as well.
Initial thoughts are that it is most likely a post-war added motto or a complete fake but it is a very interesting knife, so lets look at it a little closer.
Here is the overall reverse view of the knife and scabbard. The blade is dated 1939 from WKC, clearly stamped with the maker and RZM mark as expected. There is some heavy cleaning to the blade, which can be seen. The scabbard has had a re-paint at some point. The reverse grip plates and rivets look good. The hilt is made of zinc, which shows through the worn plating as the blue coloured metal.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
Now, let’s look at the obverse view of the knife and scabbard.
The motto looks to be etched quite strongly but it is not placed in the 'usual' position. It is placed closer to the tip of the blade than is normally seen. The plates and rivets look fine, and they are fitted very well to the hilt.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
Looking at the larger sized, later diamond, it is well fitted to the plate. It looks as though the edges of the diamond are running parallel to the grip plate pattern but they aren’t if you look closely.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
These pics show the damage to the hilt that is commonly seen on HJ knives where their original owners have used them most likely as a hammer on tent pegs or nails etc. So, based on all these factors, the knife itself does appear to be original.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
Looking closer at the motto now, the only thing that really distinguishes it from other mottoed examples is its position on the blade.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
When lined up with, and compared to another WKC mottoed example, there is very little, if any, difference in the formation, spacing and size of the lettering. See comparison here
Zooming in a little closer on the motto shows that it appears to be correctly acid etched, with the rough edges usually seen, not precise or smooth enough to be a photo-etched blade.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
There are also some scratches on the blade, which appear to run through the motto etch as well.
You don't have permission to view attachments.
So to me, the etch looks good, but is it original to the knife? We may never know but it certainly appears to be in my opinion after looking at all of these aspects. If it is a post war added motto, it has been done very well. But if so, why place it in an in-correct position? After going to all the trouble of producing a fine etch, why slip up on something so obvious?
I believe that if we saw this motto on an un-dated blade, we would accept it as original without too much thought, despite the in-correct position.
Sometimes we do see things that challenge our thoughts and what we know, and what we expect to see. Like the maker marked blades with an RZM number assigned to a different manufacturer for example.
I’d be interested in hearing what our fellow forum members think of this most interesting configuration.
And thanks Scott for providing me with the pics!
Regards
Russ
You don't have permission to view attachments.
Attachments
You don't have permission to view attachments.