M1940 Generals dagger

[DougD]

i was never much into steel, but I did have this nice M1940 generals dagger in my collection. It was worn in place of the sabre on semi formal occassions where the sabre would be out of place.

The dagger used real silver, was of better construction than officers daggers, and was longer than officers daggers. It had the generals state seal on it too.

DD

[Nota Bene]

Doug,

I might only add that this is an extremely rare dagger, and it was discontinued in 1945.

Alexei

[vvadim]

i was never much into steel, but I did have this nice M1940 generals dagger in my collection. It was worn in place of the sabre on semi formal occassions where the sabre would be out of place.

Here is portion of original regulations PCD order № 373 from October 25 1940.

<i>All general are entitled to full set of field, in formation and parade set, except for saber, spurs and dagger.
Saber and spurs are for generals of all arms(obshevoyskovie) and artillery and rest of them should were dagger.</i>

Rest means generals of aviation, armor, technical troops, communication troops and quartermaster service.

The dagger used real silver, was of better construction than officers daggers, and was longer than officers daggers. It had the generals state seal on it too.

Dagger was made from steel and covered with chrome.

I might only add that this is an extremely rare dagger, and it was discontinued in 1945.

Yes, I’m agree this is extremely rare dagger. Total number of generals in Red army in 1941 was 992, in May of 1945 it was 2952 generals and most of them were entitled to saber and spurs, not dagger. It was discontinued in 1955, not in 1945, this was a typo in Kulinsky book you are referring to.

Here I've placed first decree of Soviet of People's commissars for generals in May 1940, rest I'll put later. Sorry it's in russian.

http://rkka.ru/handbook/personal/gen-04-40.htm

Collectors should be aware that some number of such daggers were manufactured in St. Petersburg in yearly nineties and they almost identical to original, except for few minor things.
Scabbard is slightly longer and blade is slightly different in shape. Very hard to tell, but majority of generals daggers I've seen so far in US are from that partion.

vv

[sovvisor]

is it possible to take closeups of a genuine and a fake dagger to compare and point out what to look for?
best

[DougD]

vadim,

i am not sure what the meaning was. when speaking of one here in the US, by making a generalization such as "90% you have seen in US are fakes" the implication is the one in the post is a fake, without having to defend this point or give specific information as to why. from what i gather about the forum,its not really an acceptable thing to do here.

dd

[Lapa]

Originally Posted by DougD

vadim,

i am not sure what the meaning was. when speaking of one here in the US, by making a generalization such as "90% you have seen in US are fakes" the implication is the one in the post is a fake, without having to defend this point or give specific information as to why. from what i gather about the forum,its not really an acceptable thing to do here.

dd

I hope that we are not exporting this ongoing feud to a new thread!

Doug, I must respectfully disagree with you on this one, but Vadim did not say at any point that the dagger you showed is a fake. He expressed the fact that the majority of those daggers he has so far seen in the US is fake, in effect reporting his own actual experience, without reference or judgement about your artefact.
Once again, we are facing a typical communication problem where a non-speaker expresses itself with some level of difficulty in a foreign language and a native speaker interprets the written message as if originating from another native speaker. Classical texbook case-study material.

Marc