15th June 2016, 07:37 PM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 31
|
Rondel dagger
Hello colleagues by collectors, I recently bought a dagger in one of the old collector and want to know your opinion.
|
16th June 2016, 01:06 PM | #2 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
Welcome to the forum, messia .
Interesting piece indeed. Let us see what the knowledged members say about it. |
16th June 2016, 01:39 PM | #3 | |
Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 31
|
Quote:
|
|
16th June 2016, 02:14 PM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 1,207
|
I think this item is a not very old piece. At least the blade is probably made from the blade of a French Lebel bajonet M 1916. Compare the added fotos please.
regards corrado26 |
16th June 2016, 04:24 PM | #5 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 525
|
Quote:
The dagger is either from 19th century historicism but more probably a genuine piece from 14th to 16th century in very well condition. If the dagger is real, it is an very extraordinary well preserved piece and pretty rare. Roland |
|
16th June 2016, 05:29 PM | #6 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 233
|
The blade looks to me to show signs of being older but a shortened blade coming from another source. Maybe a 19th C bayonet from something else? The guard and pommel look to be newer. Maybe some better pictures of ends of them?
|
16th June 2016, 05:49 PM | #7 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 1,207
|
Quote:
Today it should not make great problems to get a rectangular base out of a round base by help of heat and high pressure. Sorry, but for me this dagger is a fake. corrado26 |
|
16th June 2016, 05:58 PM | #8 |
Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 31
|
more photo
|
16th June 2016, 10:10 PM | #9 |
Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 31
|
more foto
|
17th June 2016, 05:43 AM | #10 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 429
|
It looks to me to be an interesting assembly of previously unrelated parts.
The blank surfaces of the pommel and guard do not seem to belong on the same object as the hilt, which itself can't seem to decide how it intends to be decorated. The cruciform marking is not in keeping with the other decoration. Bear in mind, I know little or nothing about this sort of dagger, so you're getting an opinion backed only by my aging eyesight. |
17th June 2016, 11:01 AM | #11 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Posts: 182
|
Looks modern to me.
|
17th June 2016, 11:36 AM | #12 | |
Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 31
|
Quote:
|
|
17th June 2016, 02:40 PM | #13 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 1,207
|
Oh I understand, the collector was old, the friend was old, so the dagger must be old too. May be, but the bajonet M 1916 is old too
corrado26 |
17th June 2016, 03:16 PM | #14 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 525
|
Quote:
Here is your M1916. Are you really sure, that this is the same blade? Roland |
|
17th June 2016, 03:40 PM | #15 | |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
Quote:
|
|
17th June 2016, 03:47 PM | #16 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 1,207
|
This is not a M/16-LEBEL bajonet! Look at the foto of a Lebel-M/16 and compare
|
17th June 2016, 04:11 PM | #17 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 525
|
Quote:
The Lebel has a round base but the base of the dagger is rectangular! The middle ridge of the Lebel is thicker than the dagger and finally the tip is completely different. I am sure, this blade doesn't come from a Lebel or another well known mass produced bayonet. Roland |
|
17th June 2016, 04:34 PM | #18 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 1,207
|
Please, have a look to post 7
corrado26 |
17th June 2016, 11:07 PM | #19 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,058
|
the dagger under discusion is a well kknown type of all steel roundel dagger , Germany around 1400.
this type of stabbing dagger is Long, around 40-42 cm. see pictures of the same type based on the Pictures, marks, excecution and extreme length, I tend with dating of this dagger more to a later reproduction, I think i have seen the dagger before but cannot remember where it was. |
18th June 2016, 05:30 AM | #20 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NC, U.S.A.
Posts: 2,101
|
Good catch, Jasper!! I agree that it looks much newer. Historismus?
Mark |
21st June 2016, 09:58 PM | #21 |
Member
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 31
|
add photos from another phone
|
|
|