Medieval European Daggers and short Swords

[Swordfish]

Ballock Dagger c.1500

[Swordfish]

Baselard , North Italy or South Germany,14th century.
The rivets stamped with Maltese Crosses.

[Swordfish]

Dagger, South Germany,14th century, wrongly called 'Schweizerdolch'.
Also the two nails, which fix the grip, are most often wrongly called rivets, rivetting is a completely other method of fixing something as with a nail!

[Swordfish]

Ear Dagger, Italy, first quarter 16th century

[cornelistromp]

type 1A?

[Matchlock]

Good job, Gentlemen,


But in order to get our forum even more qualified and 'academically' acknowledged, I strongly plead for providing exact references of all images published. Wherever this is not possible, please leave a note stating that you tried.

I am afraid it is, among others, this certain 'lack of seriosity' which museum people generally acknowledged as academic have come to use as a lever against what we seem to be in the eyes of most of them: amateur weapons enthusiasts (German: Waffennarren, meaning 'gaga about arms') - by best.
Not one single product of media, be it in print or aired, can be expected to be taken seriously without doubtless and exact reference. I do not wish us to fall behind this standard at the beginning of the 21st century.

After all, the last thing I would like to experience would be any accuse of copyright violation or anything like this ... after all, we have learned that internet publication is not an extralegal space.

Again, it will add all the more to our common purpose: full academic seriosity and wide-spread acceptation.

I would really like to see our moderators commenting on this subject.


Best,
Michael

[fernando]

Hi Michl.

Originally Posted by Matchlock

Good job, Gentlemen,
But in order to get our forum even more qualified and 'academically' acknowledged, I strongly plead for providing exact references of all images published. Wherever this is not possible, please leave a note stating that you tried.
I am afraid it is, among others, this certain 'lack of seriosity' which museum people generally acknowledged as academic have come to use as a lever against what we seem to be in the eyes of most of them: amateur weapons enthusiasts (German: Waffennarren, meaning 'gaga about arms') - by best.
Not one single product of media, be it in print or aired, can be expected to be taken seriously without doubtless and exact reference. I do not wish us to fall behind this standard at the beginning of the 21st century.
After all, the last thing I would like to experience would be any accuse of copyright violation or anything like this ... after all, we have learned that internet publication is not an extralegal space.
Again, it will add all the more to our common purpose: full academic seriosity and wide-spread acceptation.
I would really like to see our moderators commenting on this subject.

Maybe this is not what you expect to be commented, but i would start by recalling the following forum rule included in the copyright violation section:

Posting or uploading pictures or other attachments copyrighted by a person other than yourself, without the owner’s explicit permission, is expressly forbidden by Vikingsword, when done for commercial use. However, such materials may be used to a limited extent under the doctrine of fair use for purposes of academic discussion or research. In such situations it is recommended that attribution, citations or credit be provided.

It is praise-worthy, the gesture of prompting/encouraging members with a greater 'luggage' to support their approaches and posted images with technical data, source quotations and bibliography.
On the other hand, let us always bear in mind that, although we have the previlege to be frequented by rather intelectual and academic members, we are also proud to have in our vast list, individuals with the same enthusiasm for our common passion, with the culture and knowledge of the common man.
Let us not raise the hurdle too much as to make them loose their enthusiasm in participating.

[Swordfish]

Dagger in the shape of a Sword, first half 15th century, from the castillon find.

[cornelistromp]

yes nice one I handled it during the last London Park Lane A&Af 2012, I believe the dagger, or with 63cm length perhaps a short sword? no it is not, has gone from German to English property.
Sir Guy Francis laking first mentioned the term Guillon dagger in a record of european armour and arms through seven centuries.

best,

[Swordfish]

Sorry, you are right, surely a short sword an no dagger. What is the blade length of yours in the previous post?

Best

[Dmitry]

Originally Posted by Swordfish

Ear Dagger, Italy, first quarter 16th century

What is the location for this dagger, if known? Any additional info? Thanks.

[Swordfish]

Originally Posted by Dmitry

What is the location for this dagger, if known? Any additional info? Thanks.

It was sold at auction in Italy last year, its present whereabouts is unknown to me.

[Swordfish]

Both of type 1f with short and strong blades, very broad at the hilt, strongly tapering to the tips and with short fullers in their upper thirds.
The first has a guard without elevated and reinforced tips, the pommel cap and the guard are only slightly arched towards the blade. The blade is of flattened diamond section. The grip is made of bright burl-wood. This dagger is a very early one, dating to the second half of the 13th century or early 14th century.

The second dagger has a roof-shaped blade, the front side with a midrib and a copper inlaid mark. The back side is quite flat. The pommel-cap and the guard are strongly curved towards the blade. The guard has elevated and reinforced tips of the usual form. The tang is riveted over the pommel-cap with a tall tang button. It dates to the 14th century.

Best