Stiletto for comments ... please
 

What do you guys think of this one ?
Looks like it has a clear maker's mark
... A genuine item ? :o.

.

It looks good to me. Hopefully others will chime in.

Awesome piece, Fernando! Looks like the real deal to me as well! Any numbers on the blade? (Gunner's piece?)-

Thank you for the kind words, Gentlemen.
No Mark, not a gunner's stiletto (AKA Fusetto).
I will have to find some lid to the mark.

Looking better ...
 

Amazing !
Be it because of the patina 'crust' or due to the unusual superficial marking depth, i did not see at first some of the gauge numbers still showing on the blade.
Considering that, as often written on the subject, these markings were often used to give a gunners look to the stiletto, as those as simple weapons were forbidden to carry by the authorities, one could think that in this specific case, those superficial numbers were intended to serve as a disguise ... my guess.
So, for what 'officially' counts, this stiletto is indeed a gunners fusetto, also called a centoventi, such was the name for they were popularly called, due to the numbers in the gauge going up to 120 (centoventi in Italian).
Given the work put on the dagger and the early style of the digits, i would dare to attribute its age to some time in 17th century.
But of course, i am ready to be corrected.


.

looks kosher to me!
 

Parabens, Nando! Tão sorte!

So nice to see the real McCoy for a change--so many spurious ones at arms fairs and in collections.

I suppose you have Marcello Terenzi's informative intro to the subject in Robert Held (ed.) Arms and Armor Annual, Vol. I, pp 170-79: "Gunners' Daggers". I would recommend it to all readers of this post because the illustrations include three fakes and two broken-and-reshaped examples for comparative study purposes.

Awesome to see the real deal, my friend! I am green with envy! :cool:

Captain, you don't certainly mean :o ...


.

I have Marcello Terenzi's Stiletto da Bombardiere, 1962, if anyone ever needs information from it. It's a short work but I suspect it's not particularly common so thought I'd mention it.

Obrigado Filipe,
If i do behave, would you send me the vital (two, three) pages by email ?
:o .

Thank you so much, MForde.
What should i understand as a short work ... something you could pick a couple pages from and send send them to me?
fernandoviana@netcabo.pt

Hi Fernando,
I have stiletto with the same maker's mark:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=24775

Alex, may i suggest that the mark in your beautiful stiletto does not look the same as the one in mine.On the other hand, i wonder if yours in Gyngell's work, as one of the 16th. century
.

It would be my pleasure.

Thanks Fernando,
Yes, the mark on my stiletto does look like Gyngell's work.

Hi Fernando,
I just found these in Dean Bashford's "Catalogue of European Daggers".

Thank you so much Alex,
Yes, those six pointed stars, specially the one on the #90 Cinquedea, "look" like it.

Hi Fernando,
You can download Dean Bashford's catalog for free, from Metropolitan Museum of Art site:

https://www.metmuseum.org/art/metpub...unting_Swords#

I have downloaded it half hour ago ;).
Thank you for the hint, anyhow :cool: .

Alex, I would like to thank you for sharing this most valuable tip!!! I would not have realized that was possible, and honestly was not aware of this title.
I very much value all information I can find on markings, and cannot believe I missed this one!!!

This thread has been profoundly helpful on this topic, in addition to great insight into these fascinating stiletto daggers. The paper that Philip mentioned earlier in the 'gunners daggers' has always been a sort of mainstay on these, and other resources typically mention them but only in a cursory description. Mforde, thank you for the heads up on that other Italian publication as well.

Thank you for opening this thread and these examples Fernando.

Jim, You are welcome! Glad that I can help.

There is another good book that you can download from MET's site. It called: "Catalogue of European Court Swords and Hunting Swords".

https://www.metmuseum.org/art/metpub...Hunting_Swords

:)

There is nothing to thank for, Jim. It is always a pleasure to show my pieces and be contemplated with members comments; favorable or not, as it fits.

Alex, I caught that one as well when pulling up the site, absolutely excellent sources, again thank you.

Fernando, I know its not necessary, but wanted to express my appreciation. The best thing here is that one never stops learning, even 'novices' like me who have been in the game most of my life (at 74 thats a lot of time!).
Its the joy of learning FROM these weapons everyone shares that is the magic.

I have been digging into the mystique that involves this type of daggers, namely their name, their typology and their purpose.
Concerning their name, i am amazed to have found one more; stiletto, fusetto, centoventi ... and now regola; the last two obviously referring to the ‘scales’ marked between notches in the blade.
As typology (if i may call it so) it appears to descend from the famous misericordia.
The purpose; starting by their sharp point, we may select one or all of three uses, cleaning the cannon touch hole, piercing the gunpowder bags and plug the touch hole in case of retreat in battle.
And at last, the more controversial ; marked from 1 to 120 (apparently always 1-3-6-9-12-14-16-20-30-40-60-90-100-120), is often being conotated with the calibres measurement, probably as it looks like the immediate simple inferrement. But looking at assumptions made by those considered experts in the matter, this is rather improbable according to some and even stated as being something else by others.

From Daghe & Coltelli “Apparati per la tavola e la guerra nel Rinascimento europeo”
… other versions of the same dagger, reported notches on the blade ("stiletto centoventi") and it was said that it was also an instrument used by gunners to measure the calibres of the guns; but this interpretation, contested by many experts, for the disparity of the measurements and the arrangement of the same on the blade, left space also to another legend: being a weapon easily concealable and for this very often prohibited, that the excuse of professional use could be a valid reason for possession.

Or ...

From “Quaderni Friulani di Archeologia VII/1997 by FABRIZIO BRESSAN”
The shape of dagger is recognised in fusetto or centoventi, the style at one's disposal to the Veneti gunners used approximately from the middle of the XVII century to the whole Seven hundred; the weapon is distinguished for one characteristic staircase, in notched numbers from 1 to 120 (why the name) that, carved on one of the faces of blade they were representing a reminder of calibres (to note, not their "measure") used by artilleries of the then Serene Highness.


Having that said, and considering that, at the period, such concealable daggers were highly prohibited to carry around, as per abundant published material, we could gather that, the markings on the blade, were only a subterfuge to illude the law, by giving them a professional attribution; their actual utility not being the issue.

Pardon my ignorance, but where can I find some documentation that daggers were prohibited in Venice? My understanding is that up until early 18th century, swords and daggers could be openly carried by city state citizens.

For example, Cosimo Medici was described as "wearing a coat of mail under his jerkin, a sword and a dagger hanging from his belt, and with numerous small stiletti, with very sharp points, almost as fine as needles, stuck into the lining of his scabbard as into a needdle-case".

Maybe trying harder some references may be found ... just kidding ;).
For all we know, the prohibition of carrying a determined weapon, for its special specifity, is implicitely excluded from the right to carry weapons in general. We could perhaps take Spanish navajas, crossbows, or (cup hilted) swords with off mark blades, for pertinent examples...

A member from the previledged Medici family is hardly an example :rolleyes:; and the centoventi as such, appeared almost four centuries after he has gone to heaven. Maybe the prohibition of such concealable weapon was result of flourishing Cosimo's imitators; this assuming that, his fixation for wandering around with such arsenal, was a fact.

... And by the way; how is your Italian?
From Guida del raccoglitore e dell'amatore di Armi Antiche - 1900

.

Thank you for your reply, Fernando. Cosmo Medici wondered about with such arsenal in early to mid-16th century, right when these "gunners' stiletti" appeared on the scene. I also take sources from early 20th century with a grain of salt, scholarship had moved on since then and many early theories about bearing arms in the early modern period were debunked

I will take your advise and look for references.

Obrigado

I assumed that not ALL weapons had the ban, just stilettos based on their concealability and assumed use as an 'assassin's weapon', much as switchblade knives were/are illegal in parts of the U.S.

What am i missing, batjka ?
MY COSMO existed 1389-1464, and the gunner's stiletto in a centoventi dress appeared by mid 1700 ... am i wrong ?

While gunners' stiletto did appear in the 17th century, stiletto as a weapon form came about much earlier, in the 15th century.

I would love to see actual city statutes that prohibit stiletti as "dangerous weapons". A lot of what we assume today is an invention of 19th century historians. Take Langes Messer, for example. It was long claimed that this weapon form became popular because it was a workaround statutes prohibiting citizens from wearing swords. So people started wearing "long knives" because they were "not a sword". We now know that it is a complete and utter nonsense. Burghers were not prohibited from wearing swords and if they were this technicality would not have helped them. A knife-type hilt construction came about due to guild regulations where knifemakers were able to get into a sword making business.