[Ian]

Hi Detlef:

Good point. What I should have said was that all of the old style (19th C.) examples I have seen had a concave spine on the blade, downward angled tang, and a "thumb rest" at forte. This compares to what many of the more recent examples have evolved (degraded?) to, with a straighter spine, less of an angle between the tang and blade, and no "thumb rest."

There are intermediate forms that retain some of the older features, such as a more acutely angled tang or a concave spine of the blade. The "thumb rest" seems to have been the first feature to be omitted, and is uncommon on these knives after WWII (I would not say disappeared after WWII based on my comments above). I think the next to go was probably the concave spine of the blade and lastly the angled tang. The latter features probably reflect less skill or time required in making the knife. The appearance of examples with slender blades (as shown in several of Leif's examples) also seems to date from the WWII period and later, and again suggest a use more for stabbing and slicing rather than chopping.

As far as edge treatment on these knives, I think quenching may be the main method used on more recent examples and perhaps edge insertion on older ones. I don't recall many inserted edges on more recent examples that I have seen. Some of the blades, even clearly older examples (of which I've handled maybe 20 or so), seem to be monosteeel although most were not etched to reveal any lamination so it's hard to be sure. One of the HOS examples above seems to have some lamination.

Many of the more recent knives, while perhaps lacking the skill and time that went into making the older style, are still very sturdy knives that cut well and would serve their original purpose. The wide variety of hilts seen on more recent examples came largely during and after WWII, when they were originally marketed to U.S. troops.

Ian.