Ear dagger

[messia]

Hello colleagues by collectors, I recently bought a dagger in one of the old collector and want to know your opinion.

[CSinTX]

In my opinion, I think it's a modern build with imitation ageing applied.

[messia]

Originally Posted by CSinTX

In my opinion, I think it's a modern build with imitation ageing applied.

I add more photos, it may be better seen.

[messia]

Originally Posted by CSinTX

In my opinion, I think it's a modern build with imitation ageing applied.

after this photos are not changed for your opinion?

[Roland_M]

Hi Messia,


The state of corrosion seems natural to me. Otherwise it is the very best artificial aging I ever saw. I don't believe in artificial aging, because it would be pretty unusual for european blades.
It also make no sense, to age the blade but not the hilt.
I tend to believe it is a 19th century work.

If you can find traces of laminating, the blade could be from 15th century. But this is almost impossible to judge from the pictures only.

I added two pictures of genuine ear daggers.

They are a clear evidence, that one cannot judge the age of a blade from its state of corrosion!


Roland

[corrado26]

I found the mark on the blade in " Wendelin Boeheim, Handbuch der Waffenkunde". But it might be difficult to decide wether it is an original mark or a fake............
corrado26

[Reventlov]

Originally Posted by corrado26

I found the mark on the blade in " Wendelin Boeheim, Handbuch der Waffenkunde". But it might be difficult to decide wether it is an original mark or a fake............

This mark (or one very close to it) definitely appears on a few halberds... is that the context that Boeheim gives? Cannot say that I have seen it on a dagger before.

Solothurn
Philadelphia

[ulfberth]

Hello Messia,
Dear All,

I have taken some detailed pictures of the pitting of this dagger and added a sword pommel , that has in my view has the same kind of pitting.
Does anyone have a different view or do we see similar pitting in all pics.
Just added a blade with different more profound pitting.

Thanks in advance for your comments

Ulfberth

[Reventlov]

A similar mark is also reported to be on a 17th century rapier and the breastplate of a Maximilian armour, both from the former collection of Karl Gimbel. A strange assortment...

[Sajen]

Here is one I have in my picture archive. I think that the one in question is an original antique piece and very nice!

Regards,
Detlef

[ariel]

The really old ones were orders of magnitude more elaborate and artistic.
The one in question IMHO is most likely early-mid 20 century. Except for some pitting it has no signs of age. Might have been kept un-oiled: corrosion sets fast.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by ariel

The really old ones were orders of magnitude more elaborate and artistic.
The one in question IMHO is most likely early-mid 20 century. Except for some pitting it has no signs of age. Might have been kept un-oiled: corrosion sets fast.

Hello Ariel,

I am by far not an expert by this daggers but the attached ivory at the ears look very old to my eyes and not like 20 century ivory. And look at the piece in up from post #5 Roland has posted, this piece isn't as well not very elaborate and artistic but since it seems to be a museum piece clearly antique.

Regards,
Detlef

[ariel]

OK, let's date it to the 19th century:-)

Even then such dagger would be a replica.
The real ones were out of commission by the 16th century, but replicas were made all the time.
https://myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=22689

I am with Roland.

[Timo Nieminen]

When did acid-etching such as on this dagger start being used to decorate weapons like this?

Common in the 19th century for sure. I have 19th century blades with similar corrosion, so I think 19th century replica fits the appearance.

[Jim McDougall]

I have a hard time telling but if that motif is indeed acid etched, it would certainly seem to place into 19th c.
The cross in the shield while of course simplistic, seems to be an arsenal type mark of Vienna, which would account for its occurrence on polearms.
If it was some sort of guild associated mark, that would explain why it might be on a dagger blade. Daggers were of course personal, not issue type weapons, thus the arsenal suggestion for halberds.

According to Mann (Wallace Coll. pp.374-75) these 'ear' daggers are of early Spanish-Moresque design which reflect even earlier Eastern forms which include the 'Luristan' types and of course yataghan hilts.

These were produced in Italy, mostly Venice, in the 16th century+ and termed 'daga alla Levantina' or 'alla Stradiotta', often by 'Moorish' workers in Venice.
Typical arms interaction between Vienna and Venice would account for the diffusion of course to the north.

I would be inclined to regard this example as possibly 17th c. though would consider the etched design possibly later as noted, but not sure of the antiquity of this process,
As far as pitting and corrosive activity, it seems to me that this kind of light pitting is not unusual for very old weapons, and is commensurate with the static situation of the weapon and such circumstances. If it was on display or static for some time, dust and moisture absorption would be evident on the side most exposed.
Still, again depending on situations, any type of corrosion can accede rather quickly in cases.

[corrado26]

I found this ear dagger in my foto archive with the equivalent description of the seller:
Magnificent 19th C. Spanish Ear Dagger in 15th C. Moorish style, Toledo work of Zuloaga type: A truly magnificent antique ear dagger. This example has a fine grip and is covered in silver and gold koftgari of very fine quality. A very beautiful dagger and almost impossible to find at all in any condition much less this quality. Dates to the 19th C. and likely composed by the finest toledo smiths in the classical spanish Moorish style typical of the finest Eusebio Zuloaga work. Overall length is 16", 10" blade, 2 3/4" from ear to ear.
corrado26

[messia]

add photos from another phone

[messia]

and

[fernando]

How relative may the antique attribution be ?
Calling an end XIX century ear dagger an antique is eventually a figure of speech. Whether not well established if Nasrids brought this dagger from North Africa to the Iberian Peninsula as being a weapon of their creation or if indeed it has a previous (Oriental) provenance, the fact is that it is one of the more important contributions of the Nasrid panoply, like the jineta, was well available in their workshops in the XIII century; in such way that the only original example of this type, eventually belonging in the attire of Muhammad XII (Boabdil) when he was captured in the battle of Lucena (1483) is already considered by specialists as a 'later' version; in any case, an example matching with the adornments of a king, now in the Real Armeria de Madrid, the shield of the Nasrid sultanate figuring in its scabbard.
But a adornment was also the one we can see depicted in a portrait of King Emperor Carlos V (circa 1519).
So calling XIX-XX century examples a replica wouldn't be such a crime .

.

[Jim McDougall]

Further, as well noted by Fernando:

From "Arms and Armour of Spain: A Short Survey"
Ada Bruhn de Hoffmeyer, p.200

"...the Spanish dagger above all, is however the ear dagger".

"...the eared dagger is of oriental origin. Very probably it has its origin in Iran or at the borders of the Caspian Sea. Its earliest forerunners are to be found in Luristan among eared daggers of the Bronze Age. Later time Iranian specimens with grips of ornamented silver from about 400-600AD have almost the same shape as the Spanish types. They may also be called the prototypes of the ear dagger. It came to Europe with the Moors of Andalusia and partly with the Saracen artisans working in Venice. "

Clearly this classic form is found in antiquity, and was replicated in commemoration of these traditional daggers at various times over the centuries.
It seems well established that the 19th century replicas of these forms have indeed become antiques in their own right.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Further, as well noted by Fernando:

From "Arms and Armour of Spain: A Short Survey"
Ada Bruhn de Hoffmeyer, p.200

"...the Spanish dagger above all, is however the ear dagger".

"...the eared dagger is of oriental origin. Very probably it has its origin in Iran or at the borders of the Caspian Sea. Its earliest forerunners are to be found in Luristan among eared daggers of the Bronze Age. Later time Iranian specimens with grips of ornamented silver from about 400-600AD have almost the same shape as the Spanish types. They may also be called the prototypes of the ear dagger. It came to Europe with the Moors of Andalusia and partly with the Saracen artisans working in Venice. "



Clearly this classic form is found in antiquity, and was replicated in commemoration of these traditional daggers at various times over the centuries.
It seems well established that the 19th century replicas of these forms have indeed become antiques in their own right.

I was reading Ada Bruhn de Hoffmeyer thus you beat me to it Jim ! See https://books.google.com.om/books?id...dagger&f=false and a picture below and some ear daggers...Amazing that these as a style appear to have originated in Luristan ...

[Reventlov]

Another interesting reference is a 1964 article by J.J. Rodriguez Lorente, which suggests criteria for distinguishing ear daggers of Moorish, Spanish, and Venetian craftsmanship.

The XVth Century Ear Dagger. Its Hispano-Moresque origin

The article mentions a large collection of daggers held by the Museo Lazaro Galdiano. Nine daggers appear in the museum's online catalogue:

Museo Lazaro Galdiano

A little drawing by Hans Schaufelein (c. 1510) shows that Northerners were also aware of this style of dagger, and made use of it at least as an "exotic" artistic element.

Hans Schaufelein, Archer Drawing His Bow

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... antiques in their own right...

So are we both, Jim ... with the particularity that we are genuine specimens

[Reventlov]

Check out this one... auctioned by Czerny's in March 2010, estimated at €18,000, went for €210,000. Then in October of the same year, resold at Sotheby's for more than €4,200,000!

Czerny's, March 2010
Sotheby's, October 2010

On the hilt, between the ears, the dagger bears what appears to be the Nasrid coat of arms. The same arms (and same maker's mark of an orb-and-cross) appear on other daggers, such as one in the Bargello.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by fernando

So are we both, Jim ... with the particularity that we are genuine specimens

Roger that Nando!!!!!

[Jim McDougall]

Interesting to see the discussion and responses posted here on this dagger, in comparison to its posting now running concurrently on sfi forum

[fernando]

You ain't seen nothing yet. How is your castillian ?

http://www.alhambra-patronato.es/fil...sa_nazar__.pdf

[Gavin Nugent]

I personally feel this is a 19th century blade that has been refurbished in the 20th century. I feel this was because of certain patina inconsistencies throughout the various materials found on this knife...at the very least I personally consider the grips and hammered bronze work to be of the 20th century.

Gavin