Rondel dagger

[messia]

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

[fernando]

Welcome to the forum, messia :) .
Interesting piece indeed. Let us see what the knowledged members say about it.

[messia]

Welcome to the forum, messia :) .
Interesting piece indeed. Let us see what the knowledged members say about it.
Yes. Thank you for your interest in waiting for responses. :)

[corrado26]

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

[Roland_M]

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.
corrado26

The Lebel has a round base, but the rondel dagger has a rectangular tang.

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

[CSinTX]

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?

[corrado26]

The Lebel has a round base, but the rondel dagger has a rectangular tang.


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 :rolleyes:

[messia]

more photo

[messia]

more foto

[Bob A]

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.

[stekemest]

Looks modern to me.

[messia]

Looks modern to me.

Dagger is not modern, I bought a dagger in the old collector, collector bought the knife from an old friend, age Dagger minimum 80 years was in the hands of these people :shrug:

[corrado26]

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

[Roland_M]

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

No reason to be cynical. How about a picture as a clear evidence of your bayonet-theory?

Here is your M1916. Are you really sure, that this is the same blade?


Roland

[fernando]

No reason to be cynical...
A good point !

[corrado26]

This is not a M/16-LEBEL bajonet! Look at the foto of a Lebel-M/16 and compare

[Roland_M]

This is not a M/16-LEBEL bajonet! Look at the foto of a Lebel-M/16 and compare


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

[corrado26]

Please, have a look to post 7
corrado26

[cornelistromp]

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.

[M ELEY]

Good catch, Jasper!! I agree that it looks much newer. Historismus?
Mark

[messia]

add photos from another phone