"Ther is no man worthe a leke Bee he sturdy, be he meeke But hee bere a Basilard." -Lyrics from an early 15th century song contained in the Sloane Manuscript.😁
On the workshop site, Tod has a Castillion Dagger that he describes as "part dagger, part sword and the rest is club." The blade is 15cm thick at the base, 45 cm long (61 overall), and I want it desperately. Feels like someone in the mid 15th century got annoyed they weren't allowed to carry a sword in town.
this puts the learning difficulty of acquiring a new language into perspective. Also its cool how languages that have zero in common (like latin languages and east asian) still have a ton of similar metaphors
Very true about different languages having similar metaphors. As I understand it, “sin” in the Bible scriptures actually means “missing the mark “, as in missing your target with an arrow. So to break one of the 10 commandments, it takes on a more complete meaning to say to someone that they are missing the point.
@@jamesj4827 obviously not, hence the clarification one line below. I am well aware that he meant (and was using English correctly when doing so) the purpose of those daggers
Hi Matt, that's the kind of dagger I'd wear in town if all I could wear was a dagger, because it's good to parry blows with form larger weapons. It is in the same niche as the cinquedea and the stortetta, a kind of short sword that is not restricted by law or social rules and you can walk around with, knowing criminals and conspirators will not follow the same rules you follow and may well carry larger forbidden blades that you need to oppose.
On Tod's "Tod's Workshop" site, he has a Castillon Dagger he describes as "part dagger, part sword and the rest is club." The blade is 15cm thick at the base, 45 cm long (61 overall), and I want it desperately. Feels like someone in the mid 15th century got annoyed they weren't allowed to carry a sword in town.
Similar to the modern gangs in the US. Law abiding citizens are restricted to certain semi auto handguns and places we can carry. Gangs are carrying very illegal fully automatic Glocks. Putting LEO and citizens at a significant disadvantage.
Sir John Smythe made this point in his 1590 military treatise: "Long heauie Daggers also, with great brauling Alehouse hilts, (which were neuer vsed but for priuate fraies and braules, and that within lesse than these fortie yeres; since which time through lōg peace, we haue forgotten all orders and discipline Militarie) they doo no waies disallow, nor find fault withall, but rather allowe them for their Souldiors to weare, than short arming Daggers of conuenient forme & substance, without hilts, or with little short crosses, of nine or ten inches the blades, such as not onely our braue Ancestors, but al other warlike Nations, both in warre and peace, did weare, and vse. By the which they euidently shew that they do very litle consider how ouer-burdensome and combersome, such Alehouse Daggers are for all sorts of Souldiors both horsemen and footmen, as also how vnfit they are to be vsed with the point and thrust by Soldiors, Piquers or Halbardiers against their enemies in squadron."
As Matt mentioned one of the dagger techniques against armored opponents was, since they were well armored around the torso, to thrust in from the neck and armpit. In that case you'd probably need something longer to reach the vital organs. As for the question of the Fairbairn-Sykes being shorter it should be remembered that, while the commandos may have trained for knife "fighting" as part of their unarmed combat training that was mainly for building confidence and getting past squeamishness. Outside of that training, if they used the dagger at all, it would have been for knife "killing". Which is to say taking a sentry by surprise and stabbing him repeatedly before he could make any noise by struggling or firing a weapon. I suppose there could be some theoretical situation where a commando might be up against someone who had nothing but a knife to protect themselves. Knives were indeed carried as part of the uniform of some party members and, maybe, they might catch a cook or butcher while they were working in a kitchen but I don't think those kind of extraordinary situations would have played a part in their planning. Bearing that in mind the advantages of a longer blade (being able to block and parry) wouldn't have played a part so a lighter more compact blade that would get the job done was preferred.
It was a common situation in WWI and even WWII saw melee fighting with the Japanese Banzai charges. A small part of the fighting for sure but it still happened. As the years go by this becomes less and less of an event. Hell, nowadays even small arms fire is a minor part of the casualties, with heavy weapons and drones being responsible for most of them.
Did some reanactment as a low nobel knight once. Took place over a couple of days. First I gurted my sword, but soon found out that a sword is very annoying. For example, sitting, walking in small spaces and not to forget while taking a shi* in desperation (the brouche wasn't comming of to quickly if you know and the sword belt intangled with the normal belt). After a day, I only worn my sword in armor and out of it I wore a late mideval german half Rondel Dagger. Even with a 22 cm blade it was way easier to menage.
I have one of those Wakefield daggers, you were there chatting with Tod when I bought it. If I were a medieval guy I would consider that to be an ideal EDC. For the modern age a Sheffield bowie suffices, but that is not so much about penetration as woodwork :)
It is, from the episode in Blackadder 2 when he's hosting a booze-up to prove he can drink while also hosting a dinner for his puritane uncle and aunt, trying to convince them to make him the heir to their fortune. Great, now I wanna watch all of it again, and A Bit of Fry and Laurie...
One advantage of a longer dagger when fighting in armor you didn't address is. Since you can only get the blade through an available gap, a longer blade has better odds of hitting something vital. The design of your larger dagger is optimized for being able to go the deepest through a relatively small hole, making it very effective when used against mail. You have to break much fewer links to penetrate to the same depth as your shorter rondel dagger.
I definitely agree, I do a lot of armored fighting, with wrestling, and I love to carry a dagger as a backup to my spear typically 6 to 8 inches. We also do dagger duels sometimes for fun and in those cases a longer dagger is useful if you stay out of grips. Once you are grappling an elbow or forearm can more easily push the point out of line on a longer dagger and it's easier to pin with an arm or by laying on it. It's harder to cleanly switch hands while wrestling with a large dagger because it's more likely to catch something. In balance for armored fighting even starting out of range I would say your shorted dagger would be what I would want. This is a lot which basically amounts to " I agree".
A D Guard Bowie seems to be the best compromise length for unarmored street defense, for cutting at the offending arm. The comments regarding knife / sword laws in the U.S., The Supreme Court has implicitly ruled that all length restrictions, blade weapon types are presumptively unconstitutional. They have also ruled that the 2A applies to city codes. Nontheless there’s the practical reality of the aforementioned…
Even in Canada you can use a 6 inch or shorter fixed blade for EDC. Most people don't though, except during hunting season. Multi tools and 2 - 3 inch pocket knives are the most common
I enjoyed the video, as always. Perhaps this might have been added in support of your shorter on the battlefield, longer on the street argument. There are many sources showing an icepick grip for daggers, and these typically are set in tournament or battle settings. This reinforces the point that the dagger style in European armored combat was more grab-and-stab. It only adds a smaller bit of support to the case you made so well. Context, as always, matters. Cheers, Matt!
Longer tantos and wakizashis were also popular for a short time in Japanese history. The main reason is that there are always some people who believe that longer daggers have more tactical advantages. But overall, like all excessively long blades in history, they will soon return to a more suitable length after all. In addition, partly to avoid legal restrictions, some gangsters use longer tantos and wakizashis and then claim that they are not regular katanas subject to legal restrictions.
This kinda makes me think if back is the day if you tell where a person lived and worked just based on their weapons. Cus if Canterbury tales is something to go by, people that live outside cities weren't subjected to such strigent weapon laws.
I seem to recall you got better penetration with Tod's big rondel when you added the gauntlet, due to increased weight. In that vein, a larger, heavier rondel might also get deeper. But compared to the disadvantages in a fully armoured context, I don't expect that would be too small an advantage.
This exactly why I bought the windlass poignard. A dagger large enough to fence with and maintain reach. I think large dagger training is one of the more practical things to learn in modern times. Still easier to carry compsred to a sword but often advantageous compared to knifes or smaller daggers. The cutting ability isn't perfect but can definitely nick and disable/discourage someone. Sadly I can't find a lot of videos and classes regarding fighting with larger dagger types.
i think the Fairbairn smatchet vs. the F-S dagger is a great case study into “big vs. small knives”. its not that one is plainly better; rather, different designs work better for different applications.
Great video. I dont think any of those long daggers could reliably be drawn and deployed when you've been tackled to the ground and are wrestling either, and thats a very real part of combat. Even the shortest one will have a hard time pulling out when you're in a choke hold, hands on the guys arm around your neck and knife scabbard stuck between his body and yours. Even if you pull it, it's obvious you did and can be taken from your hands. Plus getting the leverage to stab it into someone whos trying to wrestle grapple you, a blade that long might be hard to thrust into somone from the ground position. A small normal sized dagger or flip pocket knife is probably a good "get off me" knife to carry too. Plus it can be used as your regular tool. A small stilleto used only for thrusting through modern clothing like thick winter jackets etc is probably the best option for that situation. Since a longer blade cant be used when someones already grappling you ontop.
A 13 inch poniard is nice. In addition to everything mentioned, if you are attacked and you fall onto your back, you can draw and plant the hilt in the ground beside you. If the attacker jumps on you, you've got an extra six inches above your hip or belly.
Well said, from the beginning I was trying to think of how to explain the way that blade length affects stabbing force. See, I can hardly say it now😂 Good job👏
Is there any difference between a long rondel dagger and a Misericorde. The Misericorde was narrow enough to put the blade through eye slits on the helmet and slip between plates on the opponents armour. It was also a means of dispatching a seriously wounded knight as the French name implies "Mercy Stroke", from the Latin "Misericordia" = Act of Mercy. Your arguments for the longer dagger are sound, as each knight will be an individual who would want a weapon to suit their fighting style and physical stature. Good post, thank you 👍
For civilian contexts I found the Bollock dagger quite interesting (and funny) since it started off as a dagger more common amongst the lower class population and moved into a sort of fashion item used by all classes with varying degrees of ornamentation visible in illuminations of nobility and rulers
There's not been many films that have caused me issues. However the scene in Saving Private Ryan where two soldiers fight hand to hand and one kills the other with a knife still gives me nightmares. So brutal. I'd hate to have to face that situation, either way. 😢
7:00 I'd also say getting through gambeson or mail requires more length and mass to punch through. Plus I also suspect steel quality is better in the Fairbairn-Sykes era. If we had to punch through chain maille rings with medieval quality steel the modern dagger would be bigger.
You might add the venerable JM Browning to your list. I think the 3rd grade was as far as he got At 7, in his father's gun shop he started tinkering &;there learned basic engineering skills. Carved his first three designs out of wood, to prove they were viable before ever casting or milling in steel. Tinkerer's as you said are the very foundation of US firearms. Also add the A1M1 carbine to your list of made by untrained engineers
Cool dagger, I like Tod's work. It is comforting because I am making a dirk that looks very much like it and I thought it was maybe unrealistically long . 👍🏻
On Tod's "Tod's Workshop" site, he has a Castillon Dagger he describes as "part dagger, part sword and the rest is club." The blade is 15cm thick at the base, 45 cm long (61 overall), and I want it desperately. Feels like someone in the mid 15th century got annoyed they weren't allowed to carry a sword in town. So I'd argue you should feel free to make whatever you want to. 100% there were times that weaponsmiths made something just for shits n giggles.
Great vid as usual - I've made a couple of Rondel daggers.... despite having fancy brass embellishments they are nasty - just damned nasty tools, ideal for their purpose.
Something like a WW1 Robbins of Dudley Push Dagger would be Way more practical for armored CQB. As an American with a CCW Firearm, I also wear 2 defensive Push daggers in case I can't get to my firearm.
Have you seen the scandi ground "Lapinleuku", they might be most for show and tourist but they big ones seem quite opposing, something like a machete but sharp?
Sharpen one edge of the rondel for close play. With decent steels you can hone a 90-degree bevel to be shockingly sharp; it just won't spread nutella very well.
I believe that I read of an interview with a very effective French partisan of the second world war. When asked the best length for a knife ( combat or fighting), he said five inches. He said it was a good length to go through a German greatcoat.
Love Todd's rondel daggers, I have 3 plus a few other randoms. Another thing you can do with daggers is chuck them, great for putting charging dudes off their game. Some gladius are good for that too at short range.
But how long is each of those rondel dagger blades? Whether the shorter on is 9 or 10 inches is quite a significant matter if you are comparing it with another rondel dagger, and you didn't say how long the longer one is at all.
Thinking of daggers used in armed/unarmored context makes me think of Dune. Shields in Dune are sort of like armor, and you don't want too long a lever that accelerates the tip of your blade. This may explain whey they use daggers rather than swords.
Modern knives, besides blade length laws, are also designed with concealment in mind. So shorter blades are wanted. I would be surprised if blade laws change, that larger bowie knife style blades and open carrie comes back.
The very long rondel dagger is at the upper limit for what I'd want for a rondel dagger, but it seems like a good length for a parrying dagger. Perhaps the length was intended in case the user needed to fend off a short sword in a pinch?
In most contexts in the past century I'd prefer a Fairbairn-Sykes or similar length. Although in a World War One trench, I think I'd rather have the shorter rondel dagger. I think because of the defensive capabilities and because I'm used to swords and butterfly knives so the length doesn't feel awkward to me.
I once sparred with a soldier highly trained in hand-to-hand combat. He was always able to push aside my hand attacking him with a practice knife. But in fact, if I had a longer dagger, moving my hand away might not have been enough and the tip of the dagger would have reached the guy.
wondering how the swords parcel force and Royal Mail ban will affect customs with swords. I am trying to purchase a long sword from Washington DC to Oxfordshire and was hoping that using UPS will work.
I have a weird monster old one that has a square profile blade and a heavy bronze handle. It can be used as a truncheon club, sword breaker, and a way to stab with. It's blade alone is 18 inches lol. It can even be used a mace if the user flipped it around and used it heavy handle as a hammer. I can't find any experts who know what it is tho. Anyone here that think they may know let me know and I'll send details on it. I'd love to know what it is exactly
Trench Dagger of some kind maybe? Square section stabbing 'blades' and heavy cast brass or bronze handles are both known features, but there was very little standardisation and a very quick search didn't find one weapon with both......
@stonedog5547 well, it ate my comment lol. So hard to direct people to stuff here with links etc not allowed. I guess it thinks I'm spamming. I'll try to tell ya how to see it without spaces and see if that works
Well, I'm not sure the extra three or maybe four inches on that big rondel are going to make a huge difference in deployment rime, but the point is certainly valid. And the second point, engagement range is crucial. Part of what we teach in trad jujitsu is to try to get inside the attackers weapon range- a roundhouse punch for example, is a lot less likely to be decisive if the forearm hits your head instead of the fist. Even more so with blades. Especially stabby ones. Can't get that point into a gap? No use. And the close you get, the more important it becomes. (Othismos debate hobby horse time; if Hoplites fought ALLWAYS at spear-point distance, WHY did the Spartans switch to very short Xiphos blades? Must've been a practical reason. Conclusion? Sometimes Hoplites got in very close, shield on shield). Another good video sir.
Three to four inches is a massive difference in terms of speed of deployment. That is another three to four inches that needs to clear the sheath/scabbard before it can be used and when speed of the draw is a concern (generally some form of ambush), speed of deployment is one of your most critical concerns, and that can come down to fractions of a second. Furthermore, the longer the weapon, the more deployment is liable to be restricted by confined spaces and more easily someone can prevent you from being able to deploy it. While the larger weapon is often advantageous once drawn, the shorter weapon can be more reliably and speedily drawn, and those are both serious considerations.
It's always about context and tradeoffs. The shorter a dagger is, the quicker it will be to deploy. Literally every inch means it takes that much longer of a fraction of a second to pull. So you figure what's the best minimum length that will get the wrestling range job done, and you carry that - because you don't want one that's smaller and thus quicker to deploy if it isn't long enough to get the job done. So, modern weapons. Do you want a weapon that's accurate out to 1000 yards? That's going to have a longer barrel most of the time, so it'll be less useful in CQB/house clearing/when quick shots count. So maybe you want a sidearm that has a little more authority at medium range, maybe more rounds available, even like an extended magazine and a longer slide (or whatever is the correct thing to put there). But if you're carrying a basic 10 inch M4, your "close range" options with your primary weapon are better, and a smaller sidearm that's quicker to deploy might make more sense, because you won't be using it unless you're really desperate and need it really quickly. I don't know what I'm talking about in any real sense, other than to say, again, I assume there is context and tradeoffs with modern weapons the same way as swords and daggers and bow and poleaxes. If you've got a poleaxe and an arming sword (as opposed to say, a longsword), a shorter dagger makes a lot more sense, because you aren't going to use it at sword range, you'll only pull it when your poleaxe and sword are no longer assets.
@@DerrillGuilbert While that is largely correct, there is another layer of consideration that changes one of your points. Factors like confined spaces aside, the larger the weapon, the more advantageous it is, especially in competition with other weapons. While we generally want to carry the smallest tool possible to accomplish the goal, the larger the tool, the better and more efficiently it tends to perform at achieving said goal and in the case of weapons, the more advantageous a position you put yourself in as compared to whoever you are drawing it against. There is a trade-off in use efficacy and risk reduction versus generalized efficiency and practicality. Eg, I think it is no coincidence that the swords developed and relatively standardized in the time and location where quickdrawing and unsheathing attack sword disciplines were most thoroughly developed (Edo Period Japan) 'happened' to prefer swords of around the maximum blade length that can be reliably drawn (anything longer has a significantly higher failure rate under pressure). Your latter point is historically corroborated. For a significant stretch of time, the Swiss infantry tended towards daggers (or short swords) as their sidearm/secondary weapon over, and the landsknechts favored short hacking swords and the Romans their pugio. Secondary/side-arms and auxiliary weapons were often selected to cover for challenges that their primary weapon was unsuitable for, different range parameters being a primary one of them.
I always have to remind myself that when Matt says medieval, he doesn't actually mean roughly 500 CE to 1500 CE. He actually means something like 1350 to 1500.
Something surprises me a bit: if this large dagger is to be used for fighting in a civilian context, it should probably have sharp edges so that the opponent cannot grab it / knock it aside safely. And here this dagger looks a bit like a rod... But maybe I'm wrong and I'm just seeing things wrong on the screen.
I got a kindjal and have found myself wondering what school of fighting it should follow as it's long for a dagger yet short for a sword and that middle ground is kinda odd 😂
How much blade can one hide under the clothing of a period? Nobel women and their warrior class ladies often carried long knives under their kimonos, saris and frocks and knew how to use them. Also, everyone in an army's train had one or more weapons at hand for defense.
All these reasons would apply to those 15th/16th century peasant messers. Except, the messers generally didn't have much of a point. Would that be because they were also used as tools and attacking someone in armor was less likely, so a fragile point was not as desirable?
In the context of armored fighting, is there an optimum mass for a dagger? I mean - yes a shorter blade is easier to control, but if you want to punch through mail or heavy padding, wouldn't a certain amount of mass make that easier? Is there a sweet spot between something being easy to control, and having just enough heft to give your attacks some extra 'oomph'?
Longer blade will bend more, so ideally, you want to add mass in some other way, without increasing length. Of course it's doable only to a degree, something that's too wide and thick doesn't penetrate well either. But stout, wide and thick geometry behind fine, if reinforced point would be, theoritically ideal.
I wonder if like in the US different laws restrict weapons, firearms, edged, or pointed. If it is illegal to carry a sword but not a dagger what is the definition of dagger vs a sword? The blade length? So if the law states the length then a blade just below that length is a dagger and not a sword. So a sub set of daggers is created for the grey area, too long for battle and too short for casual defense where a sword would be better but not allowed. Would such civil limitations be created in the time lines discussed? Where would the later triangular, square and regular bladed stilettos work in comparison? Yes, the Rondel hilts provide much more thrust power. I guess a social use of the dagger lasted up to at least the Nazi uniforms of the 1930s. Though the SA may have found practical use for them in the street fights before WW2. The realitive penetration depths do matter, depending on how big the target and what it is wearing. Even modern firearms have to balance that. Cartridge and bullet designs are different to meet the penetration needs. For elephant you need to penetrate deep into the skull to the brain. A person, especially in a crowd, reach vital organs with out hitting people that may be behind with over penetrations. And in battle today as in older times armor penetration becomes an issue. The armor vs weapon wars continue.
State law where I'm at says any blade longer than 3.5 inches is a deadly weapon. Any blade shorter than that isn't a deadly weapon. The prison shank has entered the chat, you could say.
remember switching to your rondel dagger is always faster than reloading
Technically true.
Well... you do have to take into account how long it will take to run up to the other guy if you've been firing a longbow at them;).
😂
Especially if you're reloading a huge crossbow with a big winch.
What kind of name is soap?
Thank you for continuing to be Matt Easton
Yes, a very reassuring thing. Especially these days.
Do we need a spare?
I, for one, would continue to watch his videos, even if he stopped.
"Ther is no man worthe a leke
Bee he sturdy, be he meeke
But hee bere a Basilard."
-Lyrics from an early 15th century song contained in the Sloane Manuscript.😁
So a bigger dagger is not really a bigger dagger, but smaller sword
On the workshop site, Tod has a Castillion Dagger that he describes as "part dagger, part sword and the rest is club." The blade is 15cm thick at the base, 45 cm long (61 overall), and I want it desperately. Feels like someone in the mid 15th century got annoyed they weren't allowed to carry a sword in town.
“Who knows what is good and what is bad? A dagger is good if you have it and bad if you don’t.”
I see you as a man of high culture, sir.
The point of those massive daggers? Well, it's the part furthest away from the handle.
Nevermind, couldn't help purposely misinterpreting it
this puts the learning difficulty of acquiring a new language into perspective. Also its cool how languages that have zero in common (like latin languages and east asian) still have a ton of similar metaphors
Surely you can't be serious
Very true about different languages having similar metaphors. As I understand it, “sin” in the Bible scriptures actually means “missing the mark “, as in missing your target with an arrow. So to break one of the 10 commandments, it takes on a more complete meaning to say to someone that they are missing the point.
@@jamesj4827 obviously not, hence the clarification one line below. I am well aware that he meant (and was using English correctly when doing so) the purpose of those daggers
@@Maedhros0Bajar ...You disappoint me sir, the correct answer is 'I am and don't call me Shirly'
So, to sum up, we should aspire to building extensive personal armouries. Good to know.
Hi Matt, that's the kind of dagger I'd wear in town if all I could wear was a dagger, because it's good to parry blows with form larger weapons. It is in the same niche as the cinquedea and the stortetta, a kind of short sword that is not restricted by law or social rules and you can walk around with, knowing criminals and conspirators will not follow the same rules you follow and may well carry larger forbidden blades that you need to oppose.
On Tod's "Tod's Workshop" site, he has a Castillon Dagger he describes as "part dagger, part sword and the rest is club." The blade is 15cm thick at the base, 45 cm long (61 overall), and I want it desperately. Feels like someone in the mid 15th century got annoyed they weren't allowed to carry a sword in town.
Similar to the modern gangs in the US. Law abiding citizens are restricted to certain semi auto handguns and places we can carry. Gangs are carrying very illegal fully automatic Glocks. Putting LEO and citizens at a significant disadvantage.
Sir John Smythe made this point in his 1590 military treatise:
"Long heauie Daggers also, with great brauling Alehouse hilts, (which were neuer vsed but for priuate fraies and braules, and that within lesse than these fortie yeres; since which time through lōg peace, we haue forgotten all orders and discipline Militarie) they doo no waies disallow, nor find fault withall, but rather allowe them for their Souldiors to weare, than short arming Daggers of conuenient forme & substance, without hilts, or with little short crosses, of nine or ten inches the blades, such as not onely our braue Ancestors, but al other warlike Nations, both in warre and peace, did weare, and vse. By the which they euidently shew that they do very litle consider how ouer-burdensome and combersome, such Alehouse Daggers are for all sorts of Souldiors both horsemen and footmen, as also how vnfit they are to be vsed with the point and thrust by Soldiors, Piquers or Halbardiers against their enemies in squadron."
Wow, props for typing it all out in the original spelling.
@@brianhowe201 I copied & pasted the text in this case, though I have typed up 16th-century English many times in the past.
"Gonna go down the the alehouse, have a few drinks and stab someone with my huge dagger" - 16th Century Men, Apparently.
Civilian context reminds me of Crocodile Dundee 2: "That's not a knife, THIS is knife!"
I see you've played knifey spooney before...
I absolutely agree! And I definitely know what you are talking about!
As Matt mentioned one of the dagger techniques against armored opponents was, since they were well armored around the torso, to thrust in from the neck and armpit. In that case you'd probably need something longer to reach the vital organs.
As for the question of the Fairbairn-Sykes being shorter it should be remembered that, while the commandos may have trained for knife "fighting" as part of their unarmed combat training that was mainly for building confidence and getting past squeamishness. Outside of that training, if they used the dagger at all, it would have been for knife "killing". Which is to say taking a sentry by surprise and stabbing him repeatedly before he could make any noise by struggling or firing a weapon.
I suppose there could be some theoretical situation where a commando might be up against someone who had nothing but a knife to protect themselves. Knives were indeed carried as part of the uniform of some party members and, maybe, they might catch a cook or butcher while they were working in a kitchen but I don't think those kind of extraordinary situations would have played a part in their planning. Bearing that in mind the advantages of a longer blade (being able to block and parry) wouldn't have played a part so a lighter more compact blade that would get the job done was preferred.
It was a common situation in WWI and even WWII saw melee fighting with the Japanese Banzai charges. A small part of the fighting for sure but it still happened. As the years go by this becomes less and less of an event. Hell, nowadays even small arms fire is a minor part of the casualties, with heavy weapons and drones being responsible for most of them.
one fascinating long dagger is the Irish skean. They could equate to Tod's baselard sword in length and were sometimes referenced as rapiers
Did some reanactment as a low nobel knight once. Took place over a couple of days. First I gurted my sword, but soon found out that a sword is very annoying. For example, sitting, walking in small spaces and not to forget while taking a shi* in desperation (the brouche wasn't comming of to quickly if you know and the sword belt intangled with the normal belt). After a day, I only worn my sword in armor and out of it I wore a late mideval german half Rondel Dagger. Even with a 22 cm blade it was way easier to menage.
I have worn swords in the forest and at conventions. Major pain in the @$$, sometimes literally.
I have one of those Wakefield daggers, you were there chatting with Tod when I bought it. If I were a medieval guy I would consider that to be an ideal EDC. For the modern age a Sheffield bowie suffices, but that is not so much about penetration as woodwork :)
The less the phone booth fight the more the knife
I keep hearing Hugh Laurie's voice saying "Large one! Sounds a bit rude, doesn't it?" Must be from Blackadder...
"noticeably bigger, and it does just get in the way"
It is, from the episode in Blackadder 2 when he's hosting a booze-up to prove he can drink while also hosting a dinner for his puritane uncle and aunt, trying to convince them to make him the heir to their fortune.
Great, now I wanna watch all of it again, and A Bit of Fry and Laurie...
@@Loki_Firegod Thank you, and you're welcome! 😃
One advantage of a longer dagger when fighting in armor you didn't address is. Since you can only get the blade through an available gap, a longer blade has better odds of hitting something vital. The design of your larger dagger is optimized for being able to go the deepest through a relatively small hole, making it very effective when used against mail. You have to break much fewer links to penetrate to the same depth as your shorter rondel dagger.
I have posted a question about this a few times over the years and finally I got an answer. Thanks Matt.
I definitely agree, I do a lot of armored fighting, with wrestling, and I love to carry a dagger as a backup to my spear typically 6 to 8 inches. We also do dagger duels sometimes for fun and in those cases a longer dagger is useful if you stay out of grips. Once you are grappling an elbow or forearm can more easily push the point out of line on a longer dagger and it's easier to pin with an arm or by laying on it. It's harder to cleanly switch hands while wrestling with a large dagger because it's more likely to catch something. In balance for armored fighting even starting out of range I would say your shorted dagger would be what I would want. This is a lot which basically amounts to " I agree".
A D Guard Bowie seems to be the best compromise length for unarmored street defense, for cutting at the offending arm.
The comments regarding knife / sword laws in the U.S., The Supreme Court has implicitly ruled that all length restrictions, blade weapon types are presumptively unconstitutional.
They have also ruled that the 2A applies to city codes.
Nontheless there’s the practical reality of the aforementioned…
Even in Canada you can use a 6 inch or shorter fixed blade for EDC. Most people don't though, except during hunting season. Multi tools and 2 - 3 inch pocket knives are the most common
So, I should start wearing a groß messer, lol.
I enjoyed the video, as always. Perhaps this might have been added in support of your shorter on the battlefield, longer on the street argument. There are many sources showing an icepick grip for daggers, and these typically are set in tournament or battle settings. This reinforces the point that the dagger style in European armored combat was more grab-and-stab. It only adds a smaller bit of support to the case you made so well. Context, as always, matters. Cheers, Matt!
Longer tantos and wakizashis were also popular for a short time in Japanese history. The main reason is that there are always some people who believe that longer daggers have more tactical advantages. But overall, like all excessively long blades in history, they will soon return to a more suitable length after all.
In addition, partly to avoid legal restrictions, some gangsters use longer tantos and wakizashis and then claim that they are not regular katanas subject to legal restrictions.
If your katana is not long enough, there's always an oar
@@gwcstudio That's mostly for when you want to humiliate someone tho.
Another advantage to the long blade with the older sheath, it is much more likely to hang blade down.
This kinda makes me think if back is the day if you tell where a person lived and worked just based on their weapons. Cus if Canterbury tales is something to go by, people that live outside cities weren't subjected to such strigent weapon laws.
I seem to recall you got better penetration with Tod's big rondel when you added the gauntlet, due to increased weight. In that vein, a larger, heavier rondel might also get deeper. But compared to the disadvantages in a fully armoured context, I don't expect that would be too small an advantage.
I may also add that the restrictive nature of the gauntlets makes the wiggling of the point less significant as your wrist cannot move so easily.
This exactly why I bought the windlass poignard. A dagger large enough to fence with and maintain reach. I think large dagger training is one of the more practical things to learn in modern times. Still easier to carry compsred to a sword but often advantageous compared to knifes or smaller daggers. The cutting ability isn't perfect but can definitely nick and disable/discourage someone. Sadly I can't find a lot of videos and classes regarding fighting with larger dagger types.
The Scottish Dirk or a Cinquedea is a great blade to have when you're not wearing a sword.
i think the Fairbairn smatchet vs. the F-S dagger is a great case study into “big vs. small knives”.
its not that one is plainly better; rather, different designs work better for different applications.
Great video. I dont think any of those long daggers could reliably be drawn and deployed when you've been tackled to the ground and are wrestling either, and thats a very real part of combat. Even the shortest one will have a hard time pulling out when you're in a choke hold, hands on the guys arm around your neck and knife scabbard stuck between his body and yours. Even if you pull it, it's obvious you did and can be taken from your hands. Plus getting the leverage to stab it into someone whos trying to wrestle grapple you, a blade that long might be hard to thrust into somone from the ground position. A small normal sized dagger or flip pocket knife is probably a good "get off me" knife to carry too. Plus it can be used as your regular tool. A small stilleto used only for thrusting through modern clothing like thick winter jackets etc is probably the best option for that situation. Since a longer blade cant be used when someones already grappling you ontop.
A 13 inch poniard is nice. In addition to everything mentioned, if you are attacked and you fall onto your back, you can draw and plant the hilt in the ground beside you. If the attacker jumps on you, you've got an extra six inches above your hip or belly.
That long rondel dagger looks quite fearsome blade. The hilt looks also cool
Well said, from the beginning I was trying to think of how to explain the way that blade length affects stabbing force. See, I can hardly say it now😂 Good job👏
You've been pumping out the videos, bud. Taking me a while to catch up.
I enjoyed that. Good points, context is everything.
Is there any difference between a long rondel dagger and a Misericorde. The Misericorde was narrow enough to put the blade through eye slits on the helmet and slip between plates on the opponents armour. It was also a means of dispatching a seriously wounded knight as the French name implies "Mercy Stroke", from the Latin "Misericordia" = Act of Mercy. Your arguments for the longer dagger are sound, as each knight will be an individual who would want a weapon to suit their fighting style and physical stature. Good post, thank you 👍
This video reminds me
Of the dagger fighting scene in the last duel. The one thing i really enjoyed from that film was the duel.
These are also the reasons why the spikes on war hammers are short.
Reminds me a conversation I saw on Arms and Armor about "Coustille" "daggers".
Lots seemed to be JUST this side of too long for city use.
For civilian contexts I found the Bollock dagger quite interesting (and funny) since it started off as a dagger more common amongst the lower class population and moved into a sort of fashion item used by all classes with varying degrees of ornamentation visible in illuminations of nobility and rulers
There's not been many films that have caused me issues. However the scene in Saving Private Ryan where two soldiers fight hand to hand and one kills the other with a knife still gives me nightmares. So brutal.
I'd hate to have to face that situation, either way. 😢
7:00 I'd also say getting through gambeson or mail requires more length and mass to punch through. Plus I also suspect steel quality is better in the Fairbairn-Sykes era. If we had to punch through chain maille rings with medieval quality steel the modern dagger would be bigger.
See Pesh-kabz, the serpentine type, precisely designed for mail.
You might add the venerable JM Browning to your list. I think the 3rd grade was as far as he got At 7, in his father's gun shop he started tinkering &;there learned basic engineering skills. Carved his first three designs out of wood, to prove they were viable before ever casting or milling in steel. Tinkerer's as you said are the very foundation of US firearms. Also add the A1M1 carbine to your list of made by untrained engineers
Cool dagger, I like Tod's work. It is comforting because I am making a dirk that looks very much like it and I thought it was maybe unrealistically long . 👍🏻
On Tod's "Tod's Workshop" site, he has a Castillon Dagger he describes as "part dagger, part sword and the rest is club." The blade is 15cm thick at the base, 45 cm long (61 overall), and I want it desperately. Feels like someone in the mid 15th century got annoyed they weren't allowed to carry a sword in town. So I'd argue you should feel free to make whatever you want to. 100% there were times that weaponsmiths made something just for shits n giggles.
Great vid as usual - I've made a couple of Rondel daggers.... despite having fancy brass embellishments they are nasty - just damned nasty tools, ideal for their purpose.
I feel that the larger dagger would be very useful for a lot of Fiores grapples with the dagger. Using it to hook and throw opponents
The rondel dagger _she told you not to worry about_ 😋
Something like a WW1 Robbins of Dudley Push Dagger would be Way more practical for armored CQB. As an American with a CCW Firearm, I also wear 2 defensive Push daggers in case I can't get to my firearm.
My intuition was right.
I had rogue/ranger type character that carried multile lengths and types of knife for vering purposes.
Have you seen the scandi ground "Lapinleuku", they might be most for show and tourist but they big ones seem quite opposing, something like a machete but sharp?
Thanks for the video ⚔️ For me I like a normal sized dagger but no more than 10 inch at the max
Sharpen one edge of the rondel for close play. With decent steels you can hone a 90-degree bevel to be shockingly sharp; it just won't spread nutella very well.
I believe that I read of an interview with a very effective French partisan of the second world war. When asked the best length for a knife ( combat or fighting), he said five inches. He said it was a good length to go through a German greatcoat.
Love Todd's rondel daggers, I have 3 plus a few other randoms. Another thing you can do with daggers is chuck them, great for putting charging dudes off their game. Some gladius are good for that too at short range.
But how long is each of those rondel dagger blades? Whether the shorter on is 9 or 10 inches is quite a significant matter if you are comparing it with another rondel dagger, and you didn't say how long the longer one is at all.
Leverage. Thats how you get the point in. Thats the point
Thinking of daggers used in armed/unarmored context makes me think of Dune. Shields in Dune are sort of like armor, and you don't want too long a lever that accelerates the tip of your blade. This may explain whey they use daggers rather than swords.
Very interesting. Thanks Matt
Modern knives, besides blade length laws, are also designed with concealment in mind. So shorter blades are wanted. I would be surprised if blade laws change, that larger bowie knife style blades and open carrie comes back.
These massive daggers are made specifically to impale the prostibots that infest the early comment section.
That’s what the red hot poker’s for
The very long rondel dagger is at the upper limit for what I'd want for a rondel dagger, but it seems like a good length for a parrying dagger. Perhaps the length was intended in case the user needed to fend off a short sword in a pinch?
I do prefer the smaller dagger but I love the large dagger grip
I have heard that Dagger and Buckler was a common thing. Could you elaborate on it please?
The Quillon Daggers I make normally have a blade length of 10 inches.
In most contexts in the past century I'd prefer a Fairbairn-Sykes or similar length. Although in a World War One trench, I think I'd rather have the shorter rondel dagger. I think because of the defensive capabilities and because I'm used to swords and butterfly knives so the length doesn't feel awkward to me.
Here's where, I'll be "that guy" and say I'm bringing a trench shovel.
Summa summarum , there isn't a one, the best, multipurpose tool...
All find the right one for the specific job.
One can do a lot with a short sword in one hand & a 10 inch dagger in the other & they are way easier to wear for sure. Lol
For close in work something like a karambit or saca trepas is excellent. Almost as if designed for toe to toe engagements.
Which is hilarious as they're actually agricultural tools. Specifically, they're meant for winnowing.
@@allengordon6929
Winnowing indeed. Just a different type of wheat.
So that was length covered, Matt, but how about girth?
When are we going to see you playing with Tod's swirk?
Always thought provoking
Tod does make a heck of a blade doesn't he?
I think you will find that the length of a person's arms in a fight is not quite as fixed as you imply, but they only ever get shorter
The Black Knight denies your theory.
I once sparred with a soldier highly trained in hand-to-hand combat. He was always able to push aside my hand attacking him with a practice knife. But in fact, if I had a longer dagger, moving my hand away might not have been enough and the tip of the dagger would have reached the guy.
Superdry gear is back folks
wondering how the swords parcel force and Royal Mail ban will affect customs with swords. I am trying to purchase a long sword from Washington DC to Oxfordshire and was hoping that using UPS will work.
...and a certain intimidation factor. And who's to say you couldn't also have a little 'food' dagger on your belt as well?
I think we can all agree the ahlspiess is the ideal rondel dagger.
I have a weird monster old one that has a square profile blade and a heavy bronze handle. It can be used as a truncheon club, sword breaker, and a way to stab with. It's blade alone is 18 inches lol. It can even be used a mace if the user flipped it around and used it heavy handle as a hammer.
I can't find any experts who know what it is tho.
Anyone here that think they may know let me know and I'll send details on it.
I'd love to know what it is exactly
Trench Dagger of some kind maybe?
Square section stabbing 'blades' and heavy cast brass or bronze handles are both known features, but there was very little standardisation and a very quick search didn't find one weapon with both......
@stonedog5547 well, it ate my comment lol. So hard to direct people to stuff here with links etc not allowed. I guess it thinks I'm spamming. I'll try to tell ya how to see it without spaces and see if that works
Could you combine a parrying dagger with a buckler?
Of course! You could combine a buckler with ANY one-handed weapon. But swords and daggers (of all kinds) were the natural pairing.
@@joshtiscareno1312 No I thought if you could combine them to one weapon. The grip of the buckler is also the handle of the dagger.
Honest Question, how successfull would a (supported) parry with a dagger be against an full overhead swing of a polaxe?
Well, I'm not sure the extra three or maybe four inches on that big rondel are going to make a huge difference in deployment rime, but the point is certainly valid. And the second point, engagement range is crucial. Part of what we teach in trad jujitsu is to try to get inside the attackers weapon range- a roundhouse punch for example, is a lot less likely to be decisive if the forearm hits your head instead of the fist. Even more so with blades. Especially stabby ones. Can't get that point into a gap? No use. And the close you get, the more important it becomes. (Othismos debate hobby horse time; if Hoplites fought ALLWAYS at spear-point distance, WHY did the Spartans switch to very short Xiphos blades? Must've been a practical reason. Conclusion? Sometimes Hoplites got in very close, shield on shield).
Another good video sir.
Three to four inches is a massive difference in terms of speed of deployment. That is another three to four inches that needs to clear the sheath/scabbard before it can be used and when speed of the draw is a concern (generally some form of ambush), speed of deployment is one of your most critical concerns, and that can come down to fractions of a second. Furthermore, the longer the weapon, the more deployment is liable to be restricted by confined spaces and more easily someone can prevent you from being able to deploy it. While the larger weapon is often advantageous once drawn, the shorter weapon can be more reliably and speedily drawn, and those are both serious considerations.
It's always about context and tradeoffs. The shorter a dagger is, the quicker it will be to deploy. Literally every inch means it takes that much longer of a fraction of a second to pull. So you figure what's the best minimum length that will get the wrestling range job done, and you carry that - because you don't want one that's smaller and thus quicker to deploy if it isn't long enough to get the job done.
So, modern weapons. Do you want a weapon that's accurate out to 1000 yards? That's going to have a longer barrel most of the time, so it'll be less useful in CQB/house clearing/when quick shots count. So maybe you want a sidearm that has a little more authority at medium range, maybe more rounds available, even like an extended magazine and a longer slide (or whatever is the correct thing to put there). But if you're carrying a basic 10 inch M4, your "close range" options with your primary weapon are better, and a smaller sidearm that's quicker to deploy might make more sense, because you won't be using it unless you're really desperate and need it really quickly. I don't know what I'm talking about in any real sense, other than to say, again, I assume there is context and tradeoffs with modern weapons the same way as swords and daggers and bow and poleaxes.
If you've got a poleaxe and an arming sword (as opposed to say, a longsword), a shorter dagger makes a lot more sense, because you aren't going to use it at sword range, you'll only pull it when your poleaxe and sword are no longer assets.
@@DerrillGuilbert While that is largely correct, there is another layer of consideration that changes one of your points.
Factors like confined spaces aside, the larger the weapon, the more advantageous it is, especially in competition with other weapons. While we generally want to carry the smallest tool possible to accomplish the goal, the larger the tool, the better and more efficiently it tends to perform at achieving said goal and in the case of weapons, the more advantageous a position you put yourself in as compared to whoever you are drawing it against. There is a trade-off in use efficacy and risk reduction versus generalized efficiency and practicality. Eg, I think it is no coincidence that the swords developed and relatively standardized in the time and location where quickdrawing and unsheathing attack sword disciplines were most thoroughly developed (Edo Period Japan) 'happened' to prefer swords of around the maximum blade length that can be reliably drawn (anything longer has a significantly higher failure rate under pressure).
Your latter point is historically corroborated. For a significant stretch of time, the Swiss infantry tended towards daggers (or short swords) as their sidearm/secondary weapon over, and the landsknechts favored short hacking swords and the Romans their pugio. Secondary/side-arms and auxiliary weapons were often selected to cover for challenges that their primary weapon was unsuitable for, different range parameters being a primary one of them.
yes
Would there be any particular reason people might orefer a baselard to a rondel dagger?
Sits flatter to the body as carried.
Aesthetic taste, rests flush against the body, allows for different grips.
You say civilian dagger, I say civilian short sword. Let's call the whole thing off. :-)
you could dislocate joints and thuss increase your arm length
Claymore in the streets, sgian-dubh in the sheets?
What is a sword if not a big dagger? What is a spear if not a dagger with extra reach?
I wonder if this was partially an explanation to the misses of why he came home with another rondel dagger?
I always have to remind myself that when Matt says medieval, he doesn't actually mean roughly 500 CE to 1500 CE. He actually means something like 1350 to 1500.
"... get you in the head or neck ... which is a really bad thing."
Cheers!
I'd switch the blade types on the two. The longer one looks more pokey, while the short one looks more slashy. Sorry for the overly technical jargon.
Something surprises me a bit: if this large dagger is to be used for fighting in a civilian context, it should probably have sharp edges so that the opponent cannot grab it / knock it aside safely. And here this dagger looks a bit like a rod... But maybe I'm wrong and I'm just seeing things wrong on the screen.
I got a kindjal and have found myself wondering what school of fighting it should follow as it's long for a dagger yet short for a sword and that middle ground is kinda odd 😂
How much blade can one hide under the clothing of a period? Nobel women and their warrior class ladies often carried long knives under their kimonos, saris and frocks and knew how to use them. Also, everyone in an army's train had one or more weapons at hand for defense.
All these reasons would apply to those 15th/16th century peasant messers. Except, the messers generally didn't have much of a point. Would that be because they were also used as tools and attacking someone in armor was less likely, so a fragile point was not as desirable?
Even in civilian context I don't see why oversized rondell daggers should be used in lieu of more suitable weapons. For example, messer?
In the context of armored fighting, is there an optimum mass for a dagger? I mean - yes a shorter blade is easier to control, but if you want to punch through mail or heavy padding, wouldn't a certain amount of mass make that easier? Is there a sweet spot between something being easy to control, and having just enough heft to give your attacks some extra 'oomph'?
Longer blade will bend more, so ideally, you want to add mass in some other way, without increasing length. Of course it's doable only to a degree, something that's too wide and thick doesn't penetrate well either. But stout, wide and thick geometry behind fine, if reinforced point would be, theoritically ideal.
I wonder if like in the US different laws restrict weapons, firearms, edged, or pointed. If it is illegal to carry a sword but not a dagger what is the definition of dagger vs a sword? The blade length? So if the law states the length then a blade just below that length is a dagger and not a sword. So a sub set of daggers is created for the grey area, too long for battle and too short for casual defense where a sword would be better but not allowed. Would such civil limitations be created in the time lines discussed?
Where would the later triangular, square and regular bladed stilettos work in comparison? Yes, the Rondel hilts provide much more thrust power.
I guess a social use of the dagger lasted up to at least the Nazi uniforms of the 1930s. Though the SA may have found practical use for them in the street fights before WW2.
The realitive penetration depths do matter, depending on how big the target and what it is wearing. Even modern firearms have to balance that. Cartridge and bullet designs are different to meet the penetration needs. For elephant you need to penetrate deep into the skull to the brain. A person, especially in a crowd, reach vital organs with out hitting people that may be behind with over penetrations. And in battle today as in older times armor penetration becomes an issue. The armor vs weapon wars continue.
State law where I'm at says any blade longer than 3.5 inches is a deadly weapon. Any blade shorter than that isn't a deadly weapon. The prison shank has entered the chat, you could say.