So apparently they show up late 15th century, probably into Spain and Italy via the Arab-speaking lands. Okay great, if true. But are there anything resembling these things in Arab-speaking countries? I'll admit, daggers during this time period is something I have looked into and seems to be a black-hole in general. I've looked mainly at Mamluks, however. Maybe these things were Moorish (and would explain the popularity in Spain)?

I have a pet hypothesis that these (ear daggers) might have been invented off the cuff and made to look Arab (or what Europeans thought was Arab) without actually being Arab at all. The point was to sell something exotic (although it might not have been that exotic in 15th century Spain) and start a fashion trend. The reason I have thought up of this hypothesis is that I have seen a lack of anything that could be the link between the Arab world and ear daggers. Of course, I am hoping somebody can set me straight and produce evidence. Still, I also could be of course just wrong and they really do have their origin in the Arab speaking world but we just don't have surviving examples.

I'm really hoping somebody's got some information on this. These things fascinate me but I know almost nothing about them.

Thanks!

HI Dan,

I think your hypothesis is basically what is believed and you first para in that they originated in the Arab world is a misreading of information.

Basically there is an Arab knife that I forget the name of, but also the Yataghan, that has 'ears' of a fashion and the hypothesis is that these were used as the inspiration for a more Europeanised version, the 'ear dagger'. Possibly true, possibly coincidence, but what is certain is that a dagger from like the ear dagger was not present in the eastern world.

Regards

Tod

What I'd often read is that they either descend from or are directly based on late Iron Age West Asian swords. However, I've never seen any specific evidence connecting the two, even if they look suspiciously similar.

---

 Attachment: 33.63 KB

Thanks for the replies! I was wondering if I was a lunatic or something (well, of course that might still be true...).

They really seemed to go to an effort to make these look like they are from the Arab world with some of these in terms of decoration. Some went as far as to have arabic writing in them, such as this one: https://www.christies.com/en/lot/lot-5723159

Tod, I immediately thought yataghan but dismissed it because I thought the timeline didn't match up. Don't ear daggers show up in the late 15th, while the yataghan shows up mid 16th? Weirdly, I did find a dagger the Met is claiming to be a British ear dagger from the late 14th: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/32779

I suppose it would have been possible that maybe both the yataghan and ear dagger had some common ancestor - maybe the Arab knife you've forgotten the name of?

Dan, that's interesting! Do you have more info on that picture (or other examples?). I found one from Iran, also in the Met:
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/27623

It looks so similar...I think the gap in time is way too big for the later versions to be decedents. But I think it is plausible that they might be based on these...I don't think that sort of thing would be unheard of. Weren't a lot of Italian arms and armor of the renaissance made to look like idealized/romanticized versions of ancient Roman arms and armor? Maybe something similar is going on here?

Unfortunately, I can't. Reverse image-searching the various pictures I've downloaded hasn't turned up anything helpful (in most cases it turned up nothing). Luristan or Lorestan are not helpful labels, because of the history of looting, fakes, and indiscriminate application of the labels to a wide variety of artefacts (which means that unless any given artefact has good, detailed provenance, it's not trustworthy for any purpose). There have been a handful controlled excavations that have gleaned some useful information, and I believe the eared dagger type is considered part of the "canonical" Luristan bronzes. The British Museum has an ornate hilt of this type with the most analysis I've seen about it.

I agree the gap is too great unless some further pieces are firmly dated in such a way as to fill it in. I see occasional claims that the style was maintained over the centuries (such as on Wikipedia's article) but have yet to come across actual examples. A direct copy is also possible; the thing is, when Medieval and Renaissance artisans made Roman-inspired items, they were working on their own turf and I could easily suppose they had art and maybe artefacts at hand to work from, whereas when the supposed model came from somewhere far away, I'm instinctively a little hesitant to credit the idea without actual, specific evidence of it happening. On the other hand, the resemblance is such that it's hard to believe it's coincidental.

What is meant in this context by Arab? The Reconquista lasted till 1492. The Muslim emirates are a possible contact point, right?

Thanks for the response, Dan! very interesting.

Ryan S. wrote:

What is meant in this context by Arab? The Reconquista lasted till 1492. The Muslim emirates are a possible contact point, right?

I'm not sure actually. Arab speaking I suppose. What you say is exactly why I was partly confused. Ear daggers show up in Spain, in the late 1400's - I think. You'd think that they'd be able to get the design right and that it plausibly came via the Moors. That made sense to me as the origin of the ear dagger but I know of no Moorish (or even culturally similar Mamluk, Turkish, Persian, etc.) daggers that look like they could plausibly serve as the ancestor of the ear dagger. This is why I thought that they were made up on the spot (or possibly a revival of the earlier looking ones like Dan mentioned...but what he had to say about this makes me wonder if it isn't just convergence...possibly like the yataghan, or maybe the ear dagger influenced the yatagahn?).

So I think I might have found something of a connection. It looks like a lot of the early ones have a connection to, or were made by, the Muslim Nasrid dynasty (deposed in 1492 - the last one in Spain). I've looked at some auctions and that keeps coming up. That might be where the Spanish got it from, and then passed it along to Italy and elsewhere. Where the Nasrid's came up with it, I haven't a clue. Here's a couple more:

https://auctionsimperial.hibid.com/lot/21857161/a-rare-spanish-ear-dagger/?sort=2&ref=catalog&epik=dj0yJnU9X2NscW5SeXJManhMb3o2blN1X2d0djFxd20yZVZEMnomcD0wJm49V2dkVmx6aFZ5dVBEOGR6QjFOSWZwdyZ0PUFBQUFBR1FLVHBj

https://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2010/arts-of-the-islamic-world-l10223/lot.250.html

Nice finds, especially the Sotheby's one. I always love a good close look at really intricate detail work.

So,
quite the interesting subject. I was actually fascinated with the "ear" style and found that it traced quite far back. But anyways, I found the answer, at least from sources I read and pictures of specimens I saw, traced much farther back than the 14th century or even 11th. The "ear" thing, was actually a thing for a variety of different cultures, its more accurately just an ancient fishtail in my opinion, although "ear" is kind of broad. So, the ancient swords of even israel have depicted "ear" styles, although much more presently in celtic swords, daggers, etc, although it was kind of all over europe with it being celt, except for it seems the Scandinavian countries, and with the greeks and romans. Were it started highly likely will never be known, as mentioned its on many ancient chinese examples as well, usually its an adopted culture thing, so tracing it would be pretty difficult. Even the japanese had their chokutō which sort of looks like a eared design in some examples, whom likely borrowed it from the koreans who likely borrowed it from the chinese. Its just a design so technically it can be from who knows where or from whom really had a thing for it "first". Kind of like saying, in my opinion, where the first parrying dagger came from, what truly qualifies really. Just me sorry for the long post.

I think the ears of an ear dagger developed out of the way the grip is made. The tang is full and especially thick, the grip is in two sections that don’t touch. With that configuration, ears make more sense than a pommel.