[Richard van der Mast]

can someone tell me more

[Scott Hrouda]

[Richard van der Mast]

it came of the noth of the netherlands(friesland)
there was it found when a old house was broken

so ca you tell me from what period this might be?

gr ricard

[Richard van der Mast]

isn't there anybody who can tell me more?

[Michael B.]

[Leo Todeschini]

Well I think there are many things that are not quite right and taken together I suspect this is not what it seems.

The form is very unusual and I have not see one like it before.
The blade flaring before the hilt is unusual.
I would expect a dagger of this status to have a reinforced point
The hilt appears to be ivory, but is not approaching symmetrical or evenly formed and the spiral twist is rough and unevenly executed - I would expect if Ivory was used it would be better worked than this.
The brass work looks like it has been lifted off other objects and used for this application.
The pommel plate is of either a very high standard of fabrication or is modern cast whilst the rest of the brass work is crudely executed.

why it was made I do not know, but I think it was made within the last 100 years or so.

I hope this helps

Regards

Tod

[Richard van der Mast]

here some more pics
maybe you can see more

thank'for the answers

[Richard van der Mast]

ans 1 pic more
mayby someone can tell me how i can check if its ivory

[Cornelis Tromp]

Iam very sorry, but it looks to me that the dagger has been recently fabricated.

BTW. did you got it from somebody out of Nijmegen?

best,

[Richard van der Mast]

no
i got this from someone out of friesland there it was found when a old house was get broken

[Peter Johnsson]

From the pictures, I do not think this is a medieval dagger.
It may be 19th century.
It could be made to be a "replica" at that time.

A few things points to this:

-The hilt seems to be "glued" together of various components. This is not a regular way to construct dagger hilts in the 14th century.
-The bronze or brass borders looks like they are cut from a running strip of repetitive rolled or stamped pattern. Not like they were shaped for the purpose. I get the impression that some one has taken the decorative border from some pice of furniture, and cut it so shape to fit this dagger hilt.
-The cap or pommel plate is glued on top of the end of the grip, with no visible riveting of the tang (this is very unusual and apart from preserved originals). It looks sort of OK if you do not look too hard or with a critical eye, but on closer observation, it stands out as very a-typical. It looks like some decorative boss taken from a lavish neo-gothic pice of furniture.
-The balls of the hilt look like they are also glued in place. Or it may be that the glue has filled the cut lines that mark the balls. Either way, it is most irregular and not at all like what you see on surviving originals.
-The whole cavity under the end band towards the blade is filled with this glue-stuff. Never seen such a construction on an original.
-The blade seems to have a midrib, but in one close up photo it is evident that one edge (at least) is blunt. Very blunt. I wonder if the blade has some strange sort of ricasso, or if it is single edged. The blade as a whole is rather badly defined. Not all originals are that carefully made, but they still look a lot ´"sharper" and purposeful than this blade. To me the blade looks like it is made to *look like* a dagger, rather than to *be* a dagger.

I would look again at the story of the find place.
It may be that the story is true, but the dagger is very unlikely to be an authentic medieval dagger.

This is from seeing the photos. I cannot guarantee my impressions is the truth, but I would be *very* surprised to hear the dagger is a genuine antique from the medieval period.