Possible old Scottish dirk ?

thinreadline · 5th February 2016, 01:45 PM

I accept this is probably a fake but would value more expert opinions than mine . Total length 48 cm, blade length 38 cm , max width of blade 4 cm , max thickness of blade back edge 9 mm.

thinreadline · 5th February 2016, 01:49 PM

some more pics of the back edge and the pommel

stekemest · 5th February 2016, 01:55 PM

Doesn't look that bad to me. Seems used, wood and leather are well patinated, the writing style of the numbers looks legit. Could also be 19th c. historicism, hard to tell, but the overall impression is quite good.

thinreadline · 5th February 2016, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stekemest

Doesn't look that bad to me. Seems used, wood and leather are well patinated, the writing style of the numbers looks legit. Could also be 19th c. historicism, hard to tell, but the overall impression is quite good.

OK thanks , that sounds encouraging , I have no reason to think is is a fake other than my usual pessimism . I have had this lying in my 'heap' for about 30 years un looked at. In fact , to my shame, and idiocy, I had thought it some kind of Khyber knife ... until a member on the Ethnographic page suggested that it was Scottish. Now of course I realise that the decoration and styling is obviously Scottish .

ArmsAndAntiques · 5th February 2016, 10:17 PM

From my limited knowledge this may be quite a rare and early dirk.

There are many forgeries but the age displayed on this example doesn't track with known style of forgery work, and even as a Victorian piece it doesn't display the feel of a Victorian attempt at an early dirk.

The date is chiseled in a manner typical and contemporary with known dated Scottish pistols, not in and of itself a mark of an original since that can be replicated. The grip appears to be boxwood or a similar type, a bit harder to copy in the 19th C. The iron fittings display the right type of age one would expect to see on a piece of 17th c. dating, more difficult to copy in the 19th C.. The blade has been cleaned at some point and displays a lack of cleaning, or rather lesser evidence cleaning towards the base, indicating that it was cleaned while the blade was attached to the grip, one of the biggest marks in my book for older work taken in the context of other points. The Celtic knotwork is of fine quality and the tooling in the leather should be examined in the context of pre-Jacobite Scottish leather work.

This is all based on photos, but if I had this I would trend more confident in 17th C. origin than not.

Kudos on a beauty!

LL

thinreadline · 6th February 2016, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArmsAndAntiques

From my limited knowledge this may be quite a rare and early dirk.

There are many forgeries but the age displayed on this example doesn't track with known style of forgery work, and even as a Victorian piece it doesn't display the feel of a Victorian attempt at an early dirk.

The date is chiseled in a manner typical and contemporary with known dated Scottish pistols, not in and of itself a mark of an original since that can be replicated. The grip appears to be boxwood or a similar type, a bit harder to copy in the 19th C. The iron fittings display the right type of age one would expect to see on a piece of 17th c. dating, more difficult to copy in the 19th C.. The blade has been cleaned at some point and displays a lack of cleaning, or rather lesser evidence cleaning towards the base, indicating that it was cleaned while the blade was attached to the grip, one of the biggest marks in my book for older work taken in the context of other points. The Celtic knotwork is of fine quality and the tooling in the leather should be examined in the context of pre-Jacobite Scottish leather work.

This is all based on photos, but if I had this I would trend more confident in 17th C. origin than not.

Kudos on a beauty!

LL

Well thank you for spending the time to outline these points to me , this is all very interesting and to think it has spent years languishing within a heap of ethnic daggers in the loft ! This really does seem to bear further investigation .

Battara · 6th February 2016, 01:02 AM

The scabbard motif, blade, and top of the pommel look very Scottish to me.

Congratulations!

5th February 2016, 01:45 PM	#1
thinreadline Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Wirral Posts: 1,204	Possible old Scottish dirk ? I accept this is probably a fake but would value more expert opinions than mine . Total length 48 cm, blade length 38 cm , max width of blade 4 cm , max thickness of blade back edge 9 mm. Attached Images

5th February 2016, 01:49 PM	#2
thinreadline Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Wirral Posts: 1,204	some more pics of the back edge and the pommel Attached Images

5th February 2016, 01:55 PM	#3
stekemest Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Heidelberg, Germany Posts: 182	Doesn't look that bad to me. Seems used, wood and leather are well patinated, the writing style of the numbers looks legit. Could also be 19th c. historicism, hard to tell, but the overall impression is quite good.

5th February 2016, 10:17 PM	#5
ArmsAndAntiques Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 80	From my limited knowledge this may be quite a rare and early dirk. There are many forgeries but the age displayed on this example doesn't track with known style of forgery work, and even as a Victorian piece it doesn't display the feel of a Victorian attempt at an early dirk. The date is chiseled in a manner typical and contemporary with known dated Scottish pistols, not in and of itself a mark of an original since that can be replicated. The grip appears to be boxwood or a similar type, a bit harder to copy in the 19th C. The iron fittings display the right type of age one would expect to see on a piece of 17th c. dating, more difficult to copy in the 19th C.. The blade has been cleaned at some point and displays a lack of cleaning, or rather lesser evidence cleaning towards the base, indicating that it was cleaned while the blade was attached to the grip, one of the biggest marks in my book for older work taken in the context of other points. The Celtic knotwork is of fine quality and the tooling in the leather should be examined in the context of pre-Jacobite Scottish leather work. This is all based on photos, but if I had this I would trend more confident in 17th C. origin than not. Kudos on a beauty! LL

6th February 2016, 01:02 AM	#7
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,139	The scabbard motif, blade, and top of the pommel look very Scottish to me. Congratulations!