Scottish Dirk

templarnight · 4th May 2016, 09:54 PM

Thanks Jim.
I will give my observations. The patination on the grip is very deep and feels like it would be on a 18th and not 19th century piece. Also the leather scabbard and the stitching thereon is exactly as I would see on an 18th century 1796 sword. It doesn't at all feel like 19th century leather.

Jim McDougall · 4th May 2016, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by templarnight

Thanks Jim.
I will give my observations. The patination on the grip is very deep and feels like it would be on a 18th and not 19th century piece. Also the leather scabbard and the stitching thereon is exactly as I would see on an 18th century 1796 sword. It doesn't at all feel like 19th century leather.

I defer to your observations as you have the advantage of holding the piece, and would say that is quite possible. There are really no comparable examples in my scope which correspond, as I noted, this one seems unusual.
Its always good to be able to compare notes with the poster of the item, ad thereby learn more from details.
Truthfully, I have virtually no experience on these dirks so I appreciate the feedback.
Any thoughts on that curious pommel nut?

Thinking further, which 1796 stitching would you be referring to?
Remember that the 18th century only lasted 4 years, and these patterns were just barely in production by 1800. Naturally the Napoleonic campaigns helped accelerate that. The only swords with stitching were of course some officers and naval, but then by the turn of the century the much maligned 1796 dress sword.
Regardless, that these were produced in progressive volume into the century would place this example in pretty much the same period that Battara suggested c. 1800-25.
The one thing that really says 18th century to me is that pommel nut, so I would like to find more on that characteristic.
The blade on this seems remarkably clean, it seems most of the 18th century blades are either cut down sword blades or differently fullered. As this seems military by the nature of the fittings on the hilt, and the Scottish regiments were it seems less 'attended to' as they developed in the 18th c. (after arms proscriptions after the '45) it is unclear what dirks might have been like.
I think it was the stark cutting of the scabbard mounts which made me think later and to the period in Great Britain I noted with wide fascination with Scottish things . It would seem earlier mounts would be more flourished.
Just more thoughts and look forward to more of yours.

Jim McDougall · 5th May 2016, 05:08 AM

I have continued the quest on this, which has involved major excavations here in the bookmobile! but I think I have an answer.
There is simply no way this remarkably carved hilt would be Victorian

In checking Stone (1934, fig. 259)found another of these early dirks with that curious pommel nut, this one dating c. 1700-20.
Apparantly the Highland dirk was fully developed by early 18th c. The earliest known examples and references c. 1680, with these probably developed from the ballock daggers of much earlier.
These were mainstream 1725-50, but a degree of decadence had begun by the later period.
During the various disarming acts of 1716, 1725 and 1746, the Scots had to give up their swords, but many were cut down and used for knives, for utilitarian purposes. These acts were repealed in 1782, and by then the dirk had steadily begun its decline in form.
By the early 19th century, these had become more decorative accessories than fighting arms, and the decoration had become far less refined, the knotwork lacing had become broader until it became almost basket weave.
In about 1750s, the adding of studded nails or tacks began.

These carved grips with the distinct waist between them and the haunches while resembling some forms of c. 1815-25 (Peterson, 1968, #72), are far too intricately carved to be that late. The example shown in that reference has the studded, shallow basket weave effect .

In the 1750s period, as the studded nails decoration was beginning, the dark heather root grips still had the deep fluting under the pommel, (Peterson p.59) and this author (p60) notes the tang faster or ornamental flat nut was replaced by a knob after about 1740. Thus this form of four pronged nut was around c. 1710-40.

The bottom of the haunches at the blade began to disappear around 1750s but certainly by 1782.
I did find a scabbard with the sharply scalloped brass mounts from this period as well (Peterson #72).

I am still unclear on the blade, which as far as I can see is specifically for a knife, and is not cut down blade as I would expect on such an apparently early hilt .

I would say we might date the hilt components here to around 1740s-50s based on these notes. The blade and scabbard likely added later, probably more toward the end of the 18th century. I would note here that, particularly in the Highlands, distinct demarcations are difficult as far as dates and style, as noted by Whitelaw (1908). While certain conventions may have changed in more established locations, the rural and more remote areas took many years for changes to take place .

These at least are my opinions based on research from
"Daggers and Fighting Knives of the Western World"
Harold L. Peterson , N.Y. 1968, pp.59-61

"Scottish Arms Makers"
Charles E. Whitelaw, Transactions of Glasgow Archaeological Society
Vol. V, 1908, published 1934

"Early Scottish Weapons and Related Militaria"
Howard Mesnard , "Book of Edged Weapons" Ed. George Weatherly (1997)
pp.175-182

I hope this helps. Pretty fantastic dirk!!!

templarnight · 5th May 2016, 07:53 PM

Hi. Thanks for your post it's made interesting reading.
The stitching on the Scabbard just reminded me of,as an example, the 1796 Infantry Scabbard stitching. The way it's done strikes me as 18th century rather than what is seen on 19th century Scabbards, a naval Scabbard for instance.
The Blade is razor sharp and a good quality steel....I have had a good look and it could be a cut down Sword blade.
The pommel nut is screwed onto the tang and I have taken it apart.
I'm still thinking it's 18th fingers crossed!

Jim McDougall · 6th May 2016, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by templarnight

Hi. Thanks for your post it's made interesting reading.
The stitching on the Scabbard just reminded me of,as an example, the 1796 Infantry Scabbard stitching. The way it's done strikes me as 18th century rather than what is seen on 19th century Scabbards, a naval Scabbard for instance.
The Blade is razor sharp and a good quality steel....I have had a good look and it could be a cut down Sword blade.
The pommel nut is screwed onto the tang and I have taken it apart.
I'm still thinking it's 18th fingers crossed!

I was hoping you would think so. I wanted to try to find as much support as I could to make a plausible case for 18th century, and must admit going through all these references was fascinating. Actually I feel I learned quite a bit on these Scottish dirks so spending the time was most enjoyable.

I do hope you will find someone to prove your 18th century theory. As I noted I think you're probably right based on all my research. Sorry I couldn't offer more help .

4th May 2016, 09:54 PM	#1
templarnight Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 87	Thanks Jim. I will give my observations. The patination on the grip is very deep and feels like it would be on a 18th and not 19th century piece. Also the leather scabbard and the stitching thereon is exactly as I would see on an 18th century 1796 sword. It doesn't at all feel like 19th century leather.

5th May 2016, 05:08 AM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	I have continued the quest on this, which has involved major excavations here in the bookmobile! but I think I have an answer. There is simply no way this remarkably carved hilt would be Victorian In checking Stone (1934, fig. 259)found another of these early dirks with that curious pommel nut, this one dating c. 1700-20. Apparantly the Highland dirk was fully developed by early 18th c. The earliest known examples and references c. 1680, with these probably developed from the ballock daggers of much earlier. These were mainstream 1725-50, but a degree of decadence had begun by the later period. During the various disarming acts of 1716, 1725 and 1746, the Scots had to give up their swords, but many were cut down and used for knives, for utilitarian purposes. These acts were repealed in 1782, and by then the dirk had steadily begun its decline in form. By the early 19th century, these had become more decorative accessories than fighting arms, and the decoration had become far less refined, the knotwork lacing had become broader until it became almost basket weave. In about 1750s, the adding of studded nails or tacks began. These carved grips with the distinct waist between them and the haunches while resembling some forms of c. 1815-25 (Peterson, 1968, #72), are far too intricately carved to be that late. The example shown in that reference has the studded, shallow basket weave effect . In the 1750s period, as the studded nails decoration was beginning, the dark heather root grips still had the deep fluting under the pommel, (Peterson p.59) and this author (p60) notes the tang faster or ornamental flat nut was replaced by a knob after about 1740. Thus this form of four pronged nut was around c. 1710-40. The bottom of the haunches at the blade began to disappear around 1750s but certainly by 1782. I did find a scabbard with the sharply scalloped brass mounts from this period as well (Peterson #72). I am still unclear on the blade, which as far as I can see is specifically for a knife, and is not cut down blade as I would expect on such an apparently early hilt . I would say we might date the hilt components here to around 1740s-50s based on these notes. The blade and scabbard likely added later, probably more toward the end of the 18th century. I would note here that, particularly in the Highlands, distinct demarcations are difficult as far as dates and style, as noted by Whitelaw (1908). While certain conventions may have changed in more established locations, the rural and more remote areas took many years for changes to take place . These at least are my opinions based on research from "Daggers and Fighting Knives of the Western World" Harold L. Peterson , N.Y. 1968, pp.59-61 "Scottish Arms Makers" Charles E. Whitelaw, Transactions of Glasgow Archaeological Society Vol. V, 1908, published 1934 "Early Scottish Weapons and Related Militaria" Howard Mesnard , "Book of Edged Weapons" Ed. George Weatherly (1997) pp.175-182 I hope this helps. Pretty fantastic dirk!!!

5th May 2016, 07:53 PM	#4
templarnight Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 87	Hi. Thanks for your post it's made interesting reading. The stitching on the Scabbard just reminded me of,as an example, the 1796 Infantry Scabbard stitching. The way it's done strikes me as 18th century rather than what is seen on 19th century Scabbards, a naval Scabbard for instance. The Blade is razor sharp and a good quality steel....I have had a good look and it could be a cut down Sword blade. The pommel nut is screwed onto the tang and I have taken it apart. I'm still thinking it's 18th fingers crossed!