I saw this piece on an auction page sold as "16th century dagger". It looks more like a broken 18th century smallsword to me with missing parts.
I don't see any rust in the gaps between different parts, could this be a sign of rapid artificial aging?

---

 Attachment: 26.38 KB



 Attachment: 35.03 KB



 Attachment: 31.14 KB



 Attachment: 39.77 KB

I agree with your assessment. I'd call that as a smallsword with a missing shell guard and sharpened where it broke. The downward protrusions from the guard look very much like former finger rings that would have joined the shell guard when it was still there. Can't help you on the aging part.

hi, you are right. it's broken 18century smallsword. the blade seems to be broken late 17th or very early 18th century smallsword blade. hilt is broken late 18th century smallsword hilt (shell guard and knuckle guard are missing). in my opinion old parts look connected later, maybe nowadays but it's possible it was done in the past.