Colonial knife question

[Steel Hayes]

Given the time period(1780’s-1820’s), how common would a Scottish dirk be or be used?
I ask because I found one at a garage sale and it seems to be a decent piece(for a very good price).
I’d like to use it as a belt knife due to the attractiveness of it.

 

[jbwilliams3]

Incredibly rare. Also, the form of that particular dirk is closer to a ballock dagger than the traditional dirk form as it developed in the late 17th/early 18th century. Earlier Scottish dirks shared characteristics with ballock daggers, but I would submit that if anyone carried a dirk like that in North America, it would have been far earlier that mid-to-late 18th century. I've seen dirks/daggers excavated from Jamestown, for example. By mid-18th century, belt knives of any sort were rare, much less dirks, for the vast majority of European-descended folks in N.A. It all depends on the context. Indians, market hunters, backwoods militia/overmountain scots Irish - the common butcher/scalping knife is ubiquitously described in trade lists and in the archeological record.

That said, it is very common in most reenacting scenes today to carry all manner of belt knives which have no provenance to the time period. It all depends on what you're trying to accomplish. If you're just going for, "someone COULD have carried this" then go for it. If you are really trying to develop a certain persona for living history, then there are much better options. Just my two cents. I do like your dirk, though.

 

[Artificer]

Well..............that depends on a lot of things, but generally they were not common at all to downright rare.

If one of your kin were one of Governor Oglethorpe's Highlanders in GA, that dirk could have been passed down to you.

If you are old enough or one of your kin was in one of the Scottish Regiments in the FIW and settled here after the war, you would have kept it or it could have been handed down to you. Mostly that would have been in the Newfoundland/Nova Scotia area, though.

The English had proscription acts against "all Scottish culture" beginning in 1746 and even possessing such a biodag (dirk) would have gotten one in a huge mountain of "do-do" in Scotland or here until it was lifted in 1782, so even most Scots here didn't own one or had them taken away when they were being "transported" here (involuntary transport to the colonies) or even settling of their own accord.

Gus

 

[user 48679]

A bollock dagger or ballock knife is a type of dagger with a distinctively shaped hilt, with two oval swellings at the guard resembling male testes ("bollocks").
The guard is often in one piece with the wooden grip, and reinforced on top with a shaped metal washer.

The design was popular between the 13th and 18th centuries, so it's entirely possible that an immigrant from Europe would have brought it along and/or passed it down (as noted above).

IMO it looks like it would get the job done against medieval armor / chainmail.

I also think it's pretty neat. - nice grab !

 

[Jeremy Bays]

Yep...that is a bollock dagger. It was belted right down the middle of the waist around the....bollocks of a gentleman. It was a common dagger for archers in around 1300 or so. It would sell for a mint at a Ren Faire

 

[oldwood]

Our m/l hobby pretty much accommodates weapons , guns , knives , hawks , etc. from an earlier age mixed into a later age , but not visa versa. The dirk is a very nice specimen , and from an early European era , so would blend in with an American flintlock era. Few dirks are pictured in collections of artifacts, showing knives carried by frontier folks. ....................oldwood

 

[Artificer]

We also have to remember that Biodags (Dirks) were intended as personal defense weapons, not for normal "knife" applications. The 18th century Scots had different designs for their Gralloching (Hunting) Knives. The three knives at left are hunting knives and the two middle ones would still be considered very practical for that use today.

Gus

 

[hogslayer]

A bollock dagger or ballock knife is a type of dagger with a distinctively shaped hilt, with two oval swellings at the guard resembling male testes ("bollocks").
The guard is often in one piece with the wooden grip, and reinforced on top with a shaped metal washer.

The design was popular between the 13th and 18th centuries, so it's entirely possible that an immigrant from Europe would have brought it along and/or passed it down (as noted above).

IMO it looks like it would get the job done against medieval armor / chainmail.

I also think it's pretty neat. - nice grab !

Yes this is my copy of one held in the museum of London.

 

[Jeremy Bays]

From the Ospry book English Longbowmen.
Bolluck is 2nd from the left

 

[Loyalist Dave]

I’d like to use it as a belt knife due to the attractiveness of it.

That's seems to be the case, and the motivation, behind a lot of the knife choices that one sees, especially among "riflemen". You will see, and you will find for sale, a plethora of custom made hand forged cutlery for use on the belt as a "rifleman's knife", etc.

And YES a lot of them, like yours, are Very Cool!

Alas, they are also, even when made as a copy of an extant relic from the era in question, they are generally not correct. "Not correct", not because they didn't exist, or couldn't exist, but because such custom knives are so over represented among people doing living history. I think your cool knife should be kept as a treasure, even if it was a repro, and that you should explore other options for your persona's knife.

I found through some reading that what we'd today call a "common butcher knife", made in England of carbon steel, and have small pins in the handle, was much more widely found and used, and perfect for a fellow on "the frontier" to have acquired as it was inexpensive, abundant, and pretty good quality. Not very unique in appearance, but then my rifle is pretty plain too..., I want my stuff to look like I got it at the local "trading post", not custom ordered from the finest cutler or rifle builder in Carlisle, PA circa 1760. But this last paragraph is just a suggestion.

LD

 

[Nazgul58]

Sorry, but my limited experience/reading would say it was very likely that this was used in the Colonies in the 1700's. There had to be some that were available in the old world and were carried to the new world. They would not have been discarded and would be used. Outlawed be they authorities? Sure, but not surrendered. Used in the place they immigrated too? Sure.

My 2 cents.

Don

 

[Artificer]

Sorry, but my limited experience/reading would say it was very likely that this was used in the Colonies in the 1700's. There had to be some that were available in the old world and were carried to the new world. They would not have been discarded and would be used. Outlawed be they authorities? Sure, but not surrendered. Used in the place they immigrated too? Sure.

My 2 cents.

Don

Documentation please?

Gus

 

[Nazgul58]

The 78th Regiment, (Highland) Regiment of Foot also known as the 78th Fraser Highlanders was a British infantry regiment of the line raised in Scotland in 1757, to fight in the Seven Years' War. The 78th Regiment was one of the first three Highland Regiments to fight in North America.

During the period of proscription, only service in a British regiment permitted Highlanders to bear their traditional arms and dress. The 78th Fraser Highlanders, raised in 1757, wore full highland dress uniform;[11] their equipment was described by Major-General James Stewart in 1780 as including a "musket and broadsword, to which many soldiers added the dirk at their own expense."[11][12]

1. Browne James, A History of the Highlands and of the Highland Clans, Vol. IV, Edinburgh, Scotland: A. Fullarton & Co. (1838), p. 250
2. ^ Grant, James, British Battles on Land and Sea, Vol. II, London: Cassell, Petter & Galpin (1873), p. 82

This is the end of my participation in this thread. I will not engage in a war of words. We all participate in this sport for different reasons and to different levels. I simply offered a plausible reason for the existence of dirks in North America.

Don

 

[Artificer]

The 78th Regiment, (Highland) Regiment of Foot also known as the 78th Fraser Highlanders was a British infantry regiment of the line raised in Scotland in 1757, to fight in the Seven Years' War. The 78th Regiment was one of the first three Highland Regiments to fight in North America.

During the period of proscription, only service in a British regiment permitted Highlanders to bear their traditional arms and dress. The 78th Fraser Highlanders, raised in 1757, wore full highland dress uniform;[11] their equipment was described by Major-General James Stewart in 1780 as including a "musket and broadsword, to which many soldiers added the dirk at their own expense."[11][12]

1. Browne James, A History of the Highlands and of the Highland Clans, Vol. IV, Edinburgh, Scotland: A. Fullarton & Co. (1838), p. 250
2. ^ Grant, James, British Battles on Land and Sea, Vol. II, London: Cassell, Petter & Galpin (1873), p. 82

This is the end of my participation in this thread. I will not engage in a war of words. We all participate in this sport for different reasons and to different levels. I simply offered a plausible reason for the existence of dirks in North America.

Don

Not trying to argue with you, just wanted to see if you had some documentation not yet mentioned. I already spoke to settlers from the FIW Highland Regiments who probably retained their dirks.

"When the Seven Years' War ended, plans were made to ship the Regiment home to be disbanded. Subsistence rolls, taken in Quebec in August 1763, shows that the 78th Fraser Highlanders were still a formidable fighting machine after six years of campaigning in America: 36 commissioned officers, 95 NCOs, 20 drummers, and 736 private soldiers - a total strength of 887 all ranks. Any officer or soldier who opted to remain in America could take their discharge in Quebec, and 170 NCOs and privates accepted this offer. Of this number, 80 wished to settle in upstate New York, and as a special privliege, were given sufficient rations to reach Albany. "
The 78th Fraser Highlanders - After 7 Years War (78thfrasers.org)

So a maximum of 80 such dirks would have come with those men to New York and the remaining 90 remained in Canada.

Even when we add in the soldiers who remained here from the other Scottish Regiments after the FIW, there were not that many Dirks that came into the colonies that would later become the U.S.

Certainly no where near the numbers of period inexpensive trade knives.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

Should also point out the Biodag the OP listed is a Highland Self Defense weapon that was not common at all to almost unknown in the lowlands of Scotland.

A large percentage of the Scots in colonies that would become the U.S. up through the AWI were either Lowlander Scots or Scots Irish, both groups who did not use that type of self defense knife. It's true some Jacobite Highland Scots MAY have made it here with their Biodags, but had they been caught with them, there would have been all Heck to pay after Culloden. Since most of them were trying to hide the fact they were Jacobites, most probably didn't bring Biodags with them. The Highland Scots transported here against their will, certainly did not have them, as their belongings were carefully searched before they boarded the ships.

So for accuracy sake, we primarily must look at sources of Highland Scots who came to America prior to and during the AWI for the first half of the era the OP mentioned.

I'm not trying to say someone should or should not use a Biodag/Dirk for reenacting, as that is not my call. I do feel it is important to give the OP the most accurate information available, for him to consider and then the choice is up to him.

Gus

 

[Loyalist Dave]

There had to be some that were available in the old world and were carried to the new world.

Don,
That can be a problem argument. One must be careful I think with, "X existed there, earlier, and folks who had been there came here, so here there should or could be some of X as well." While an article may exist in a location at a specific era, the passage of time and contact with that area do not necessarily mean an item of material culture would be transported. Time sometimes causes the opposite..., causing an item that did journey to a new location to disappear, and there's no way of predicting which result will occur.

So there was contact with China in the 18th century, first by the Portuguese, and then heavy contact by the British between the FIW and the AWI. YET, even though it is a very efficient cooking utensil the Wok did not appear in 18th Century British cooking, nor did Chinese recipes. Curry did appear, but not something like Hunan or Szechuan cooking style nor food.

AH but there is a difference when you take the actual people and the material culture move them to the new location. This is quite true..., had the British taken Chinese people to the colonies, just as the Chinese later moved to California in the 19th century, they would've brought their culture with them and likely tools and utensils, but in the case of a wok, that item never declined in use. It's still used today....

The Scots had used that type of dirk a lot in the 17th century, but for various reasons that combined in the 18th century, the use had dropped off, and thus the making of such dirks also reduced over time, and the existing dirks then would also have declined in use, due to wearing them out or avoidance of penalties, or both. Another good example of this would be the targe.

David Morier painted this image in the 18th century..., The Scots are seen in the image with no less than 5 targe...,

So YES a person could have such a shield more than a century later in the American Colonies, but the use of them had dropped off, and I doubt folks would think them a good idea on a latter 18th century battlefield. You can carry the idea further, with armor and bows that could have survived and did. In fact Ben Franklin thought that longbows might be a viable weapon if there was a musket or gunpowder shortage, and armor chest plates were worn in Europe by some cavalry troops into the 19th century, but I doubt that anybody would suggest that a person taking part in a colonial living history setting should wear 17th century archer's armor and use a long bow...

LD

 

[Flinty Scot]

Well..............that depends on a lot of things, but generally they were not common at all to downright rare.

If one of your kin were one of Governor Oglethorpe's Highlanders in GA, that dirk could have been passed down to you.

If you are old enough or one of your kin was in one of the Scottish Regiments in the FIW and settled here after the war, you would have kept it or it could have been handed down to you. Mostly that would have been in the Newfoundland/Nova Scotia area, though.

The English had proscription acts against "all Scottish culture" beginning in 1746 and even possessing such a biodag (dirk) would have gotten one in a huge mountain of "do-do" in Scotland or here until it was lifted in 1782, so even most Scots here didn't own one or had them taken away when they were being "transported" here (involuntary transport to the colonies) or even settling of their own accord.

Gus

I've read that the proscription was lifted for those joining the Royal Regiments, and that the exemption extended to their immediate family (probably in the English, rather than the Scottish, sense). I don't recall if it extended to weapons for the family, but, apparently, it was part of the incentive.once

 

[Flinty Scot]

Don,
That can be a problem argument. One must be careful I think with, "X existed there, earlier, and folks who had been there came here, so here there should or could be some of X as well." While an article may exist in a location at a specific era, the passage of time and contact with that area do not necessarily mean an item of material culture would be transported. Time sometimes causes the opposite..., causing an item that did journey to a new location to disappear, and there's no way of predicting which result will occur.

So there was contact with China in the 18th century, first by the Portuguese, and then heavy contact by the British between the FIW and the AWI. YET, even though it is a very efficient cooking utensil the Wok did not appear in 18th Century British cooking, nor did Chinese recipes. Curry did appear, but not something like Hunan or Szechuan cooking style nor food.

AH but there is a difference when you take the actual people and the material culture move them to the new location. This is quite true..., had the British taken Chinese people to the colonies, just as the Chinese later moved to California in the 19th century, they would've brought their culture with them and likely tools and utensils, but in the case of a wok, that item never declined in use. It's still used today....

The Scots had used that type of dirk a lot in the 17th century, but for various reasons that combined in the 18th century, the use had dropped off, and thus the making of such dirks also reduced over time, and the existing dirks then would also have declined in use, due to wearing them out or avoidance of penalties, or both. Another good example of this would be the targe.

David Morier painted this image in the 18th century..., The Scots are seen in the image with no less than 5 targe...,

View attachment 69674

So YES a person could have such a shield more than a century later in the American Colonies, but the use of them had dropped off, and I doubt folks would think them a good idea on a latter 18th century battlefield. You can carry the idea further, with armor and bows that could have survived and did. In fact Ben Franklin thought that longbows might be a viable weapon if there was a musket or gunpowder shortage, and armor chest plates were worn in Europe by some cavalry troops into the 19th century, but I doubt that anybody would suggest that a person taking part in a colonial living history setting should wear 17th century archer's armor and use a long bow...

View attachment 69676

LD

I find it interesting that the Scot on the left of the front line is wearing trews, which I associate w/ lowlanders, but also a dirk on his chest? What's the rest of the story on the painting?
What's the fallicy in my understanding? Thanks.

 

[Hatchet-Jack]

There is a mention of a Dirk in my distant uncle's memoirs.

Memoir Col. Thomas Knowlton

At the battle wood creek 1758 he described a Frenchman using a Dirk.

"At this stage of the conflict, Knowlton, on entering a small
open space, saw a Frenchman enter on the opposite side. Each snapped
his musket, and both muskets missed fire. As neither of them had bay-
onets, the Frenchman endeavored to draw a dirk, but before he could
succeed, Knowlton had clasped him around the waist and now exerted all his strength to throw him."

 

[troy2000]

Very nice find. Unless you're part of a group who are absolute bears for authenticity, I'd say wear it and have fun....