Tool or dagger?

[karloj]

Greetings
Thank you very much fernando, Atlantia, cornelistromp and theswordcollector.

It seems, that Atlantia and theswordcollector think I's a sharpening steel.

Am I right, and what Atlantia also asked me, that the key feature in sharpening steel is that it is very hard ? The steel have to be very high carbon steel to quench it very hard. The surface of the sharpening tool, grooved or slick, has to be very hard. I think (If I have understood right, that quenching is making steel hard and tempering is making steel for instance more flexible after quenching) sharpening steel is not tempered at all, so it is very hard and it breaks quite easily.

Well, I do not have any means to measure hardness of the blade, Rockwell or any else scale.

So, If it is sharpening steel, the marks in the blade had to be engraved or chiseled before the quenching the blade. There is no any factory markings or any stamped marks in the blade. These engraved marks look quite primitive to me and I don't believe, that these are any factory made. Also there is many scratches in the blade, so I don't think that the surface of the blade is exceptionally hard.

Or if it is a fake, it must be tempered again in that degree that it is soft enough to grind and engrave it. Well, it's maybe easier to do a new dagger altogether and add also the thumb guard which is missing.

Thank you especially cornelistromp from putting reference in your message. It was very thrilling to read your learned opinion.

Atlantia for idea and links concerning sharpening steel. That idea I must think carefully.

I would like to ask theswordcollector, if he is 100% sure that it is sharpening steel, what are the grounds for such strong opinion? It would be very nice to get 100% correct identification.

Fernando, the blades crosscut is actually diamant.

Jussi

Post scriptum. I ask you not to pay too much attention to my English. My original language is Finnish and I hope you understand what I am trying to say.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by karloj

... Fernando, the blades crosscut is actually diamant...

Which makes it (even) more probable to be a stiletto dagger !!

Originally Posted by karloj

... I hope you understand what I am trying to say... [/I]

Completely; my english is not better .

[Atlantia]

If it is a sharpening steel, diamond section and multi-faced blades are not uncommon.
The shape and large size of this piece suggest that origin to me.
But I could be wrong. It appears to have been extensively reworked/cleaned

[Gavin Nugent]

To my eye it is a cut down small sword....

[karloj]

Originally Posted by freebooter

To my eye it is a cut down small sword....

Hello freebooter

I think that it is too small to be cut down small sword.
Here is for the comparison these two. The sword is Swedish infantry officers sword pattern 1790.

I found this picture from the net. It is part of larger picture so it is very poor quality. The text didn't mentioned it other but that is about 15th or 16th century. I don't put link, because it is in antique traders page.

Of course it's not identical, but some features are alike. And, Atlantia, it is possible, that it is a sharpening steel but it is also possible that it is not. It is possible, that it's not either, but something else altogether. That is what I am doing, searching for proof for identification.

[cornelistromp]

In addition, and to clarify post# 7, herewith pictures of some 15/16th century style characteristics that also can be seen on the dagger under discussion;

a stiff flat diamond shaped blade, flat or hollow grounded faces.
a rhombus rectangle on the gripcap or plate in case of a rondel dager, under the peened tang
a bulky steel grip
a small thumbguard (missing!)
a (baluster) shaped ricasso

unfortunately length cannot be a criterion, the length of 16th century stilettos can range from around 25cm to just under 50cm allover.

best,

[karloj]

Thank you very much cornelistromp. You truly are a gentlemen and a scholar.

I think it is safe to say, that this is what you said in your first message. This your second message and the pictures are very clarifying.

Now that I see the thumb guard which you wrote earlier, it has just the place in the dagger (I think it's OK to call it a dagger now) and where it has broken off.

The marks are a little bit annoying, but what you said about being gunners marks or something is maybe closest we can ever get.

I enclose some pictures.
Thank you also fernando, Atlantia, freebooter and theswordcollector to taking part to my quest.