19th C. stiletto?

corrado26 · 5th October 2020, 03:15 PM

When you look at the fotos of my example you immediately will see the differences: At my stiletto there are two metal rings at both ends of the wooden grip. These are missing at your oiece what makes me think that this is not original.

shayde78 · 5th October 2020, 03:20 PM

Thanks corrado for posting another beautiful example. The conversation from 2017 settled on the fact that this is not a stilleto, but rather a dagger, and was uncertain if it were correct to a pre-Victorian period, or something later. I'm curious what are the implications of another item looking so similar, but with a blade of different cross-section and with a maker's mark. Seems like this isn't something mass produced, but also something that wasn't a one-off hobbyist's project.

alex8765 · 6th October 2020, 06:00 PM

This is vintage replica, with the blade shaped like WW2 German Army dagger blade. Most likely the blade is from post WW2 German dagger, like this one. This blade is exactly the same length as yours.

shayde78 · 15th October 2020, 03:37 PM

Thanks Alex - that blade geometry is close to the blade in my original example. I have found that many single handed thrusting weapons from many cultures have blades that are approximately the same length, so I'm not sure that is the defining indicator, but the similar bevels and overall dimensions are very similar.

About the maker's mark shown on the more recent example (that isn't mine, but was recently up for auction), does that indicate an older blade form a different source that just happened to find its way into identical mounts?

alex8765 · 18th October 2020, 05:31 PM

The pommel and the crossguard of your more recent example look casted, not chiseled. So, most likely it is mid-19th century dagger. I've never seen this maker's mark before, but blade's geometry look mid-19th as well. Just my opinion. Sometimes, this seller sells artificially aged modern replicas. This dagger well could be one of those. It's hard to tell without visual examination.

Will M · 18th October 2020, 11:33 PM

The crossguard to me appears as a hexagon nut with two finials added.
I would be tempted to disassemble the dagger to confirm this and see if the tang matches German WW2 daggers.

shayde78 · 30th October 2020, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Will M

The crossguard to me appears as a hexagon nut with two finials added.
I would be tempted to disassemble the dagger to confirm this and see if the tang matches German WW2 daggers.

Hi Will,

I don't think I'll be trying to disassemble the knife (how would one even do so while keeping the components intact?).

I did, however, want to share this picture that I came across in a reference (Frederick Wilkinson's 'Antique Arms and Armor', 1972). The example (ED4) has a very similar hexagonal quillion block. Wilkinson attributes this piece to the 17th century. I can't tell from the picture if the ends of the grip terminate in ferrules or turks heads, but there are other similarities to the dagger presented in this thread.

5th October 2020, 03:15 PM	#1
corrado26 Member Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Black Forest, Germany Posts: 1,226	When you look at the fotos of my example you immediately will see the differences: At my stiletto there are two metal rings at both ends of the wooden grip. These are missing at your oiece what makes me think that this is not original. Attached Images

6th October 2020, 06:00 PM	#3
alex8765 Member Join Date: Nov 2018 Location: NYC Posts: 63	This is vintage replica, with the blade shaped like WW2 German Army dagger blade. Most likely the blade is from post WW2 German dagger, like this one. This blade is exactly the same length as yours. Attached Images

5th October 2020, 03:20 PM	#2
shayde78 Member Join Date: Mar 2017 Posts: 445	Thanks corrado for posting another beautiful example. The conversation from 2017 settled on the fact that this is not a stilleto, but rather a dagger, and was uncertain if it were correct to a pre-Victorian period, or something later. I'm curious what are the implications of another item looking so similar, but with a blade of different cross-section and with a maker's mark. Seems like this isn't something mass produced, but also something that wasn't a one-off hobbyist's project.

15th October 2020, 03:37 PM	#4
shayde78 Member Join Date: Mar 2017 Posts: 445	Thanks Alex - that blade geometry is close to the blade in my original example. I have found that many single handed thrusting weapons from many cultures have blades that are approximately the same length, so I'm not sure that is the defining indicator, but the similar bevels and overall dimensions are very similar. About the maker's mark shown on the more recent example (that isn't mine, but was recently up for auction), does that indicate an older blade form a different source that just happened to find its way into identical mounts?

18th October 2020, 05:31 PM	#5
alex8765 Member Join Date: Nov 2018 Location: NYC Posts: 63	The pommel and the crossguard of your more recent example look casted, not chiseled. So, most likely it is mid-19th century dagger. I've never seen this maker's mark before, but blade's geometry look mid-19th as well. Just my opinion. Sometimes, this seller sells artificially aged modern replicas. This dagger well could be one of those. It's hard to tell without visual examination.

18th October 2020, 11:33 PM	#6
Will M Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: In the wee woods north of Napanee Ontario Posts: 394	The crossguard to me appears as a hexagon nut with two finials added. I would be tempted to disassemble the dagger to confirm this and see if the tang matches German WW2 daggers.