I would love to see an x-ray of the original. Combining the lack of peen with the line of thought that was voiced in the video about the florets and rivet being functional, I wonder if the rondels have collars on them that slide, tight, over the tang, and the rivet secures both rondels and the grip to the tang.
That is the kind of thing I was thinking, but I could not see how it could all be made to be kept tight and lovely even at the time let alone 600 years later. But I have just thought.....I was talking to an oak timber framer (husband of the the lady who made the leather for this) and he was explaining about offset holes to tighten joints and this could well have been done here, it was just a method I had not heard of or thought about. Basically if you have two outer plates and one inner one and make the holes very slightly not line up, when you hammer the pin through it pulls everything together. This could well work. Pain in the butt for what reason?, but it would work if done right
@@tods_workshop Is it possible the handle wood is actually two-piece and the decomposition has fused them together? Then the brass could be hiding the seam and the pin would make sense.
@@tods_workshop Could it be that the tang is peened only to the lower half of the upper roundel during construction and then the top half is only held on by the brazing? I.e. the peen is hidden inside it.
@@tods_workshop also, the gaps is armor tend to be horizontal in nature. Eye slots, neck opening, abdomen opening, etc…. Might explain the 90degree edge.
If the holes in the two tang ends were offset and oblong, the rivet being pounded through would bring the two pieces together against the wood very tightly. I’ve seen farm implements connected in this manner. Maybe that’s what they did?
I love the thought of the maker being proud that everything's still tight and functional so many centuries later, but also the thought of him saying "Oh no, why is THAT one in your collection!? I've done SEVERAL better than that!"
And in a way, even though we don't know who the artisan was, they have gained some small measure of immortality through this piece being interesting and well preserved enough to stick in the minds of those who have seen it up to the point you have people like Tod making replicas of their work to this day.
About the lack of visible peening, could the tang not be peened on the inner dish of the upper rondel, and its outer counter part braised on afterwards? Such that the peening is inside the upper rondel and so not visible. No idea if that would be a strong construction, but it's the first thing that came to mind.
That was my immediate thought as well (along with many others I'm sure). My concern wouldn't be the strength but whether the braising process would do damage to the wood and brasswork of the hilt. Perhaps wrapping it in damp cloth of some sort would protect it from the heat enough.
I do love people getting together from different directions and particularly when I am involved - such a privilege to be able to discuss things like this with him
Well if that curator didn’t compliment Tod’s work, I certainly will. Tod, that’s a beautiful piece of craftsmanship and I believe any knight of the day would be happy to carry it into battle. Well done.
My copy of this piece turned up recently- lovely craftsmanship and fun to own! From a bit of handling and my limited HEMA experience with dagger fighting, my theory on the rotated blade would be its to allow you to grip the spine easier. Drawing the dagger in an ice pick grip, right handed, leaves you with the edge pointing "outwards" and the thick spin inwards. This is very easy and comfortable to then rest, steady or grip with your left hand, useful for techniques where the blade is being used to block, and to guide or push a stab through. This would be much less convenient if the blade were aligned with the edge facing "downwards" in an ice pick grip, meaning the spine is facing upwards.
Just want to say it was a delight to visit the Wallace Collection for the first time this weekend and I was blown away by the beautiful arms and armour, the level of workmanship on some of the pieces is truly astonishing. I think My 4 yr old son loved it even more! There is also a very striking recreation of King Richard the thirds armour near the entrance for which Toby Capwell acted as consultant.
I was wondering if the horizontal angle might have a parrying dynamic to it. I know that sometimes in dagger defense, with a reverse or icepick grip, you lay the blade of the dagger across the forearm to better deflect or block blows coming in (from other daggers, sometimes with an opposed sword). You see techniques like this in period treatises like Fiore, Meyer, etc. With a horizontal angle, this would present the flat of the dagger blade across the arm instead of the edge (as opposed to the spine, or holding the wrist at an awkward angle to use the flat), making a party more comfortable and less likely to damage the edge. It's a thought. Probably not (shrug)
Blade is angled for stabbing between the ribs, around the clavicle, and vertebrae. It’s easier to stab through these areas with a horizontally oriented blade, possibly; knife fighting literature teaches the horizontal orientation for this reason.
Leo Fender-founder of Fender Musical Instruments-is known for occasionally including something on one of his instruments that he thought musicians would want but-being an engineer rather than musician-he was wrong about. And sometimes these things stayed in production for a surprising amount of time since they didn’t interfere with the functionality enough or at all. I’m wondering if the grip orientation on this dagger might be something similar. The creator didn’t know that he was putting the grip on oddly, but his customers didn’t care that much since it is still functional if a bit odd.
Considering these were for using close up and personal in plate armour, would a "horizontal" blade relative to the hand have been more effective when forcing the point between plates of armour - sliding flat up one and under t'other?
Peening the first disk and than braising the second one on is possible but you will burn the wood... The other option Tod said sounds more likely to me. Two overlapping half tang's (one pre fixed to the blade and the other pre fixed to the pommel) than held together by the rivit, but that raises questions of mechanical strength...
See the pinned comment, but yes I agree, but if the tang was like a channel or a tube that could work. Damn hard way to make a knife though for what purpose except keep guys 600 years later guessing
Could it not be soldered on with lead instead of brazed? That would lower the temperature and maybe the wood would not burn. Although I still cannot imagine how to do that with medieval technology.
I see we all had the same idea for the pinning between the two rondels, but as you need to heat the rondels to braze them, for sure it could damage the wood handle. Then I thought "look at this big cracking at the center of the handle just under the initial brass plate location. Could the handle have been made as two halves, finely glued together and maintened with the brass flower rivet?", but of course you could not put in place the brasse pieces in the dovetails by doing that. It is pretty enigmatic!
Theory on the construction, not sure how plausible it is: There's actually two tangs, one from the blade, the other brazed in between the two caps on the rondel end, letting you have the completely smooth top. They sit next to each other inside the wooden part, and there is a hole in each one where those brass florets are hiding a pin to go through the whole thing. Misalign those holes slightly and you can get those two inner tangs both under a bit of pre-stress that will keep things from going anywhere when you hit the pommel.
Wonderful to see the original A726. Is it just me or did the questions of construction, type of wood, etc. seem to resonate withToby's own curiosity? I'd love to see that work done.
Assembly suggestion: The pommel end could possibly be brazed/soldered on by heating the end cup first. With it's opposite part already peened to the tang and tinned, that assembly could be lowered onto the end cup with minimal heating to the woodwork. The join would not be as strong that way, but as it would not be load-bearing it should suffice. I suspect the cross pin and decorative rivet would be to prevent rotation of the wooden handle around the tang. Keep 'em coming! - Vik
I would like to see that technique, as only way to heat metal was with the heat of forge. No fancy and precise torches. And for brazing to work, both touching metal must be at brazing temperatures. Those are far above burning point for wood. This technique would work, though, if only soft soldering was used, as far lower temperatures are used.
seems to me the 90 degree edge alignment offset would be so it would slip through gaps in armor without too much thought. Grab and poke, this way it would align with gaps of the upper body more quickly.
I agree. Since many of the gaps in the neck/face area tend to be horizontal, being able to stab trough them with an ice pick style grip, without having to twist your hand quite as much or at all, seems like a great way to deliver more force and with less thought necessary since your blade is allready mostly aligned with the eye slit for example
After watching your video on making your version, and seeing the original. I'm quite impressed with both. That original is absolutely stunning. The craftsmanship of these old weapons always surprises me.
Hi Tod, I am not as experienced and good knifemaker as you, but since watching this I've been thinking about how I would make a rondel with hidden peen and I think I have found a way it might have been done even with medieval technology (I haven't tested it in my workshop yet, I will if I get the time). 1) Braze the rondel before assembly just as you have done, but with the outer dish without a hole. 2) Cut the end of the tang to length so that when it is all assembled, there is no play left. 3) Cut the end of the tang lengthwise for a few mm - the length that it will be inserted into the rondel. 4) Make a small steel vedge so that when inserted into the cut of the tang it would spread the forked ends to a width ~ 1 mm more than the hole in the tang. 5) Put the vedge into the forked end of the tang, put the rondel over it, and hammer it down. The vedge spreads the fork so it locks tightly the whole assembly together just like a peened rivet would.
Yes, could do. But.... first, it's likely without bonding like brazing the wedge in place, it would eventually rattle loose. Second, it would be easier and more efficient to just hammer over, in opposite directions, the two parts of the fork. Sort of a "T" rivet head, rather than Tod's circumferential peening. And the issue still exists of the brazing on the other half of the rondel without burning the wood. :)
The Caucasian Qama dagger is primarily used for thrusting sideways (blade parallel to the ground). This way it can better penetrate the torso without getting caught up between the ribs. That dagger doesn't have 90º handle, but they optimized the grip by having tall rivet at the pommel for the thumb to press against. Provided how thick the blade is on this rondel, it can be operated sideways without any issues.
Given that this rondal dagger was likely for armoured opponents it is more probably rotated to align with gaps between plates, maille or eye slits. In my uneducated opinion. Based instead on this Tod, Matt and Lindy shouting "CONTEXT" inside my noggin.
Thinking of the rear rondel without the visible rivet. It seems to me that rather then attaching the two sides of the rondel and then riveting it to the dagger, they would have riveted the plate closer to the hand to the dagger and then used clamps to hold the back plate in position while they permanently attached the two plates together which would leave the River hidden I. The middle of the rondel
I got my Tod's Workshop rondel dagger today, about an hour after the video published. Love it. Tod, maybe Matt Easton might have a reason the grip is "off"?
I have an idea on how the end cap roundel was put on. But it would be impossible to tell without an x-ray. If we consider it most likely being French there is a fair chance the handle while it appears solid is not, and in fact the surviving brass strip is a cap that sandwiches the tang, and the brass inlay that was dovetailed in was to conceal this fact, and eventually fell off as unlike the other it was not secured with the through rivet. This would allow for the handle to be secured after the roundels were braised.
As a knife maker I would love to get a higher level of detail. Things like stock thickness and details about blade geometry. I would love to know more about construction. I assume that the pommel was brazed on. I believe they had the ability to do that with bronze or other non ferris. The only reason I can think of that is non decorative for the brass decoration mid handle would be to pin it. I could see that if you do the peen so that it can't be tightened then there could be a need to make sure the handle stayed firm if the wood contracted and a single pin would fix it firmly in place. I don't know how the handles were normally constructed but if the super guard was compressed somewhat it would be able to ride with the expansion and contraction. Perhaps this was the reason for the meathod given that there would be a fair bit of movement.
Considering that the wooden grip is made out of a solid piece, I don't think it would be possible to braze the rondel with the grip on, it would completely burn both on the outer and the inner side facing the tang
I'm assuming the rivet on the rear rondel is inside the rondel, and the braze it after the rivet is created internally -- that would make the bottom rondel's bond much weaker, however, so I'm not sure what constructional benefit that would give. And, as for the sideways grip, perhaps there is some advantage to the sideways blade at slipping between the gaps in armor. Particularly, I'm thinking of the horizontal eye-slits of period helmets, and the gap at the hips and waist of a breastplate where even a slender/vertical blade might snag and not penetrate.
The constructional benefit would be not loading the outside disc of the rondel. If you peen the lower disc, there's no gap that could collapse. But if you peen on the outside of the pommel rondel, should the occasion arise that the created cavity collapses, either the braze weld gives way on the disks, or the disks themselves deform, the grip would instantly become loose.
On the edge alignment and the handle shape being off. I think that possibly with rondels being used to get between plates of armor having the flat aligned with your arm would aid in being able to pry into an opening having it be a more effective lever.
Regarding the 90° rotation of the blade, could it have to do with how to best get into armour gaps, and in particular into a visor (just as some rapier systems prefer to lay the edges horizontal rather than vertical because it penetrates better between ribs)?
It would be interesting to see if it was perhaps formed initially from forging. As if its a nail construction then domed, though that may have been far too complex especially back that.
Maybe the edge is turned 90° to the grip in order to line it up with the opening in a visor of a helmet? I feel even the space between armor plates tends to be horizontal compared to the wielder of the dagger.
maybe the 90-degree angle to the blade is for getting in the gaps of the armor easier. The flat can more easily get in the overlapping plates or some such
@@tods_workshop True, I visited the tower of London before the millennium, I think it was anyway. Blown away by the set of elephant armour. We have some decent collections of fairly modern stuff here in Australia, the Armour collection in Queensland is pretty awesome if you're interested in tanks, but next to nothing over 150 years old apart from some very interesting Aboriginal items and art works, some even 40,000 years old...
Could the cutting edge orientation be set so that the back of the blade could parry? Also perhaps the tang rivet is on the inside of the lens and then was brazed together. Interesting video and beautiful work. Thank you.
With regards the alignment of blade and hand hold, maybe it was done like that to make it easier to stick through vision slits on a visor? If you're using a fist strike with the blade coming out the base of the hand and edges in line with the fist, you'd normally need to crank at the wrist a bit for it to run through the vior. But if the blade is as it is on A726, then you could keep your wrist straight. Don't know how much of an advantage that is, but just a thought.
Todd, lovely video. As has become your trademark. The floral washers and rivet - an idea. Linked to the grip being 90 deg out of true. Could the handle have been set as you did but later found to rotate? The only way to fix it would have been to rivet through the handle and tang. But, with the decorative brass strips already in place, and dovetailed in, the bladesmith did a best-can-do by riveting through the widest part of the grip and through the flat of the tang. The floral washers don't really match with the dagger design but distract from the now awkward orientation of the grip to blade. ???????? Looking at it that way the whole dagger those washers look even more out of place. ???????
On the medieval one they peened the first piece onto the tang then brazed the second piece over that and cleaned it up. I've used a variation of that assembly on cooking knives I've made. I prefer to forge weld than braze but when you are joining large regions, it's very strong.
What a mysterious and interesting piece. I bet your viewers would be happy to donate to the Museum to fund the X-ray and other analyses of it. My immediate thought was that the handle is a retrofit or requested change. It seems unlikely that any craftsperson is going to accidentally put the handle on that way, 90 degrees off edge alignment. And it seems unlikely that they'd just make a weird, undesirable piece to have on the shelf for someone to buy. But supposed the eventual dagger owner asked for the handle to be modified to have it rotated out of some personal battlefield preference. Presuming it was made normally with the tang peened on the back rondel like Tod did, the tang would be too short to fit the hand after removing the back rondel. So, the craftsman makes a second tang to re-extend the length, peens it in before brazing the back rondel together, and then grinds and joins the two inside the handle with that fleureted rivet.
Interesting. I would try it with several period gloves including metal ones to see how that handle works with them. The joining with the rivet is interesting too, but honestly does not seem very secure or stable with just one rivet.
I started my rondel, it’s got synthetic handle materials though. It’s gonna be in some rough places and I just want as little oxidation on it as possible so the only metal parts will be the blade and pommel nut.
I believe they have leather on the palms and fingers gloves with padding then armour on the back of your hand . The hole catching the sword in your hand thing is Hollywood.
@@elbowomar2430 I know that. I was thinking about how with some gauntlets, plate mitten gauntlets in particular, your grip can get a little weird depending on how the plates over your thumb and back of hand are shaped. Years ago an old friend of mine was testing a pair of mitten gauntlets for an armorer he knew and found that while they worked great with his spear and ok with his poleaxe they were almost useless with his sword. Because of how the plates interacted and the shape of his sword grip he couldn't get a secure grip on it like he could with the round spear shaft and blockier. poleaxe.
Maybe they had no gauntlets or tiny tiny hands . Could be a archers knife increased protection compared to a cross guard or he had a basket hilted sword no room for gauntlets in them.
It's possible that the final dome was brazed on after the half below it was peened. other than for looks, I have no idea why they would do it that way, though. As for the grip, I had a thought as to why the orientation is off. Could it have anything to do with how the blade would rest when gripped in an armored mitt? Barehanded it might seem backwards, but depending on exactly what sort of hand protection the owner wore, it might fit more naturally and snugly that way.
Great video, superb craftsmanship. In the subject of the grip and blade configuration, the simplest answer for that seems to be, this way the spine of the blade, the only part that can be banged on all day long, is naturally pointed against opponent's attack angles. I thing this is the only/primary reason, why the blade and grip ware been done this way.
I first saw the full "Making of" video and now this, "The Comparison". Thus eagerly waiting for part 3 - "The X-ray and wood analysis" and part 4 - "The Proper Stabby Test" (with the new version of course). Also, I wonder what the weight difference between those might be and what (if anything) that might tell about materials and the effects of centuries of corrosion.
Regarding the pommel/base plate not having evidence of attachment, is it possible that the blade and base plate are one piece? with the hilt and guard fixed on later/accessory? My theory is, that because you both described it to be more comfortable with the reverse grip, that maybe there was more focus on building it from the base-plate downwards towards the blade, therefore the handle/grip and guard being accessories rather than being central to the operation of the dagger, as it's not a typical double-edged parrying or sidearm blade. Given how the dagger was supposedly hammer-fisted between metal and flesh, I would assume it's structural strength would need to "flow" from the plate through to the end of the blade, which is why you don't see any form of attachment at the now upward-facing base-plate. Plus maybe bare-hammering it with your hand would incur some tearing on your skin if there was any metallic protrusion or cut-away. How they attached the hilt/handle and guard is beyond me as I'm not a blacksmith, I'm assuming there could be some process where heating the guard to expand to fit, would allow it to coll and squeeze on indefinitely. I'm not sure if that would support hammering into someones arm pit or whatever, but maybe the brunt of the force is borne by the base plate.
Im thinking the offset of the blade to handle is for a few reasons: 1 When leaning over someone you have more side to side stability than forward and backwards, so getting the blade to 'bite'/puncture in a fashion that helps with forward and backwards stability makes sense; 2 I imagine that a sideways blade is more likely to slip to the side rather that forward or backwards, so less likely to throw off your balance in a dramatic fashion, and probably reduces the chance of stabbing yourself, 3 extending from the slipping concept, it seems likely that they would have the sharpened edge facing away from the 'steering' arm, allowing the 'driving' arms force to be delivered more down the spine of the blade not the edge of the blade, I'm thinking this would increase the chance of the blade puncturing the armour and not glancing off.
After reading some commenters' suggestions, I'm going to guess it's attached like a wedged tendon joint over the inner disc of the pommel, to avoid the high heat needed for peening. And then maybe the wood handle is wrapped with a cloth that's kept wet during the brazing of the outer disc to keep it from burning.
Could the florets be there to pin and sandwich the handle, where I know it's one piece, but to press the handle perpendicular to the grain? To prevent splitting?
All about ergonomics and efficiency. If you have a knight in full armor on their back, the eye is a quick target to finish the job. But the slot runs horizontal to a conventional blade/tang grip direction. Thoughtful craftsmanship
I believe the reason why the blade is turned to the side when its held by the handle is because the joints, the eyeholes and those types of items were horizontal, so by having the blade turned to the side when it was being held properly it was a way of helping ensure it was more effective on the areas it would be used to attack.
Looking at how the blade appears oddly rotated to have the blade to the side... Would it make sense that it's deliberately facing "inwards" for a right handed person striking, the slight angle of strike will be slightly from outward in; which would drive well into an armpit or under up and in on an upward strike, conversely down at a very slight angle into the neck joint with an ice pick grip strike?
With respect to the upper rondel, is it possible they braised a threaded nut internally and screwed it onto a threaded tang? This is a modern construction technique. I don't know if they used it in the middle ages.
OK, really out there for the upper rondel: What if it isn't a separate piece? Perhaps they just made a really long tang, and then made it out of the extra material, similar to how nails used to be made. EDIT: Then we have the problem of how to get the bottom rondel on, but if it was slid down the tang before the top was made? I'd really love to see an x-ray of that thing!
Great video and always great to see Toby Capwell give his thoughts. On usage and ownership, one point in particular struck me. The handle is tight, on both yours and Toby's hand, as you say it rightly should be. But how would that fit with a plate gauntlet? Would be an interesting exercise to see whether there isbany difference between armoured and unarmoured fit, and then to usability differences between the two? And whilst clearly a military weapon designed to winkle through weak points and be hammered in with heel of a palm, a look at fit between armoured and unarmoured fist may go some way to answering the usage question - was this a belt hanger for an unarmoured noble at rest (hence the fancy florets and brass work) or rather a fancy looking killing blade.
the blade going sideways(by comfort of the grip) could possibly be to position the blade to better slip between sections of plates of the armor? Or even to make it easier to twist the blade in an effort to pry the plates apart while in a join(and better get through the underlying gambeson{and a potentally chainmaile layer}. Similar to an oyster shucker working his tool between the shell halves and severing the muscle inside-all is needed is a thin gap and leverage..
Always lovely to see Toby on the channel! Very curious to see the pommel not having a visible peen. Even the explanation of there being "tangs" for the pommel-rondels and then the rivet being functional rather than decorative seems odd to me. I cannot imagine forgewelding a strip of iron on the inside of the pommel or even brazing it would be very easy, and then not only burning the blade tang on, but then also the pommel's tang. It seems awfully convoluted for something which you have done in a method tried and tested for centuries and more! Very curious. An Xray would be amazing to see. Looking forward to the testing!
i hope they can scan it to find out. my guess is the bottom rondel has some sort of sleeve or bracket which interfaces with the blade tang and the grip covers this. either that or it must screw on somehow but that would seem to be less secure and surely a threaded screw system would have loosened up after all these years.
I don't know if this is feasible, either today or back then, but what came to my head when I saw the pommel disk is, what if they first pinned the bottom half of the disk, and THEN brazed the upper part? Sounds awfully more complicated, but as I see it, even if the pommel disk flattens a bit with use, it would remain thight.
Tod, for the back rondel might they have riveted on the inner disk of the rondel on first, and then braised the out disk in place to hide where that rondel attaches inside the rondel disk? Just a thought.
I'm curious about the distance between the rondels. In the video your hand fits snugly but surely a knight in armour would be wearing quite thick gloves of some sort. So wouldn't this make the space too small for a gloved hand?
An interesting disscusion,maybe you could ask if they would X-ray some of the collection? Just an odd thought but could you form the head/handle like a large headed nail and fasten it into the handle by the florrets?
Yes you could braze it on when finished. And the wood could be two pieces. When we cut wood today the saw removes some wood making seams obvious, BUT in medieval times they would split the wood allowing for a seamless look. In this case it is a two pice handle and you can see the seam under the missing brass plate and the construction of peening only the inner disk with washer is stronger than going through both due to the ability for the disk to collapse. It’s just common sense for the handy. Tod didn’t follow the proper build procedures using split handle.
About the angle of the handle, I watched a documentary about ww2 daggers and the thumb grove on the blade to make sure you used them sideways to slip between ribs. Just my thought maybe it was easier to do so for armor and that dagger.
You can wrap the grip in a wet cloth and braze the top disk on by setting it on a charcoal block and braze with a blowpipe and snips of solder sandwiched between the disks and wire the assembly together with copper wire temporarily, the way jewelers still braze and solder at the bench.
I can confirm from riveting aircraft that you absolutely will see the rivets against the metal, if a rivet was there. For example, a bare metal P-51 Mustang. You can see every single rivet on that wing, but they are all countersunk and shaved flush, and then the whole wing polished with Fuller's Earth. You can run your hands across the wing and not feel a single rivet, but you can see them from 50 feet away.
Could the strange handle position with the edge and back of the blade pointing to the sides hint top the handling in "half grip" where the left hand gips the blade? Tried it with my dagger that way and it give a relaxed and straight wrist for the left hand.
My bet is that the bottom is just screwed down with some locktite on the threads. It's probably joined by the base slipping over the top and then as you suggested the decorative piece hides the bolt.
I would love to see an x-ray of the original. Combining the lack of peen with the line of thought that was voiced in the video about the florets and rivet being functional, I wonder if the rondels have collars on them that slide, tight, over the tang, and the rivet secures both rondels and the grip to the tang.
That is the kind of thing I was thinking, but I could not see how it could all be made to be kept tight and lovely even at the time let alone 600 years later. But I have just thought.....I was talking to an oak timber framer (husband of the the lady who made the leather for this) and he was explaining about offset holes to tighten joints and this could well have been done here, it was just a method I had not heard of or thought about. Basically if you have two outer plates and one inner one and make the holes very slightly not line up, when you hammer the pin through it pulls everything together. This could well work. Pain in the butt for what reason?, but it would work if done right
@@tods_workshop Is it possible the handle wood is actually two-piece and the decomposition has fused them together? Then the brass could be hiding the seam and the pin would make sense.
@@tods_workshop Could it be that the tang is peened only to the lower half of the upper roundel during construction and then the top half is only held on by the brazing? I.e. the peen is hidden inside it.
@@tods_workshop also, the gaps is armor tend to be horizontal in nature. Eye slots, neck opening, abdomen opening, etc…. Might explain the 90degree edge.
If the holes in the two tang ends were offset and oblong, the rivet being pounded through would bring the two pieces together against the wood very tightly. I’ve seen farm implements connected in this manner. Maybe that’s what they did?
At 5:37 Toby seems like he's very keen to test out whether the dagger is _"still as usable as it was 600 years ago."_ Worryingly keen.
had the exact same thing in mind, he felt a bit stabby, as we all would in that moment :D
Just paused the video to see if anyone else in the comments thought that too lol
London, innit.
@@rogerborg Going by Toby's accent it might be more a case _"LA, bruh"_
@@QuantumHistorian Actually, I think it's more "Canada, eh"
I love the thought of the maker being proud that everything's still tight and functional so many centuries later, but also the thought of him saying "Oh no, why is THAT one in your collection!? I've done SEVERAL better than that!"
"Yeah, I mean I even put the handle on 90° wrong and that's the one you put in a museum?"
And in a way, even though we don't know who the artisan was, they have gained some small measure of immortality through this piece being interesting and well preserved enough to stick in the minds of those who have seen it up to the point you have people like Tod making replicas of their work to this day.
About the lack of visible peening, could the tang not be peened on the inner dish of the upper rondel, and its outer counter part braised on afterwards? Such that the peening is inside the upper rondel and so not visible. No idea if that would be a strong construction, but it's the first thing that came to mind.
This was my idea too, that the disc at the end was braised on after assembly.
that's my thought as well. I would even say that this construction would be "stronger", if that is for that rondel any concern.
That was my thought as well, but it would definitely be structurally weaker, I also feel as if it would be more difficult to make.
That was my immediate thought as well (along with many others I'm sure). My concern wouldn't be the strength but whether the braising process would do damage to the wood and brasswork of the hilt. Perhaps wrapping it in damp cloth of some sort would protect it from the heat enough.
Nice idea, but it would not be possible to braze it once the wood was in place
Tod, "That's as usable today as it was 600 years ago"
Dr. Capwell, slowly tightening his grip, "Mhmm..."
"who did you stab, my pretty"
Always a pleasure to see Toby and hear his analysis.
I do love people getting together from different directions and particularly when I am involved - such a privilege to be able to discuss things like this with him
I love collaborations like this - it is a history lesson, a documentary and a great ad for a museum.
Yup.. added to my list of places to go to, when I'm in London next year.
Can recommend. It's totally free to enter by the way, as is generally the case with London's museums.
Well if that curator didn’t compliment Tod’s work, I certainly will. Tod, that’s a beautiful piece of craftsmanship and I believe any knight of the day would be happy to carry it into battle. Well done.
Thank you
Toby has got the best job in the land.
My copy of this piece turned up recently- lovely craftsmanship and fun to own!
From a bit of handling and my limited HEMA experience with dagger fighting, my theory on the rotated blade would be its to allow you to grip the spine easier.
Drawing the dagger in an ice pick grip, right handed, leaves you with the edge pointing "outwards" and the thick spin inwards. This is very easy and comfortable to then rest, steady or grip with your left hand, useful for techniques where the blade is being used to block, and to guide or push a stab through.
This would be much less convenient if the blade were aligned with the edge facing "downwards" in an ice pick grip, meaning the spine is facing upwards.
A cup of tea, a digestive biscuit and watching Tod and Toby discussing the technical niceties of punching large holes in total strangers. Lovely.
Just want to say it was a delight to visit the Wallace Collection for the first time this weekend and I was blown away by the beautiful arms and armour, the level of workmanship on some of the pieces is truly astonishing. I think My 4 yr old son loved it even more! There is also a very striking recreation of King Richard the thirds armour near the entrance for which Toby Capwell acted as consultant.
Is the blade possibly angled for armour slits/eye slits and so is offset from the normal dagger for cutting?
This is quite an insight! Possibly!
I thought the exact same thing.
My thought was ribs are closer to horizontal than vertical, but I like your idea better.
I was wondering if the horizontal angle might have a parrying dynamic to it.
I know that sometimes in dagger defense, with a reverse or icepick grip, you lay the blade of the dagger across the forearm to better deflect or block blows coming in (from other daggers, sometimes with an opposed sword).
You see techniques like this in period treatises like Fiore, Meyer, etc.
With a horizontal angle, this would present the flat of the dagger blade across the arm instead of the edge (as opposed to the spine, or holding the wrist at an awkward angle to use the flat), making a party more comfortable and less likely to damage the edge.
It's a thought. Probably not (shrug)
Blade is angled for stabbing between the ribs, around the clavicle, and vertebrae. It’s easier to stab through these areas with a horizontally oriented blade, possibly; knife fighting literature teaches the horizontal orientation for this reason.
Home sick this week, been bingeing some of your content. Thanks. Always entertaining.
Awesome! Thank you!
Always a pleasure to see Dr. Capwell.
Leo Fender-founder of Fender Musical Instruments-is known for occasionally including something on one of his instruments that he thought musicians would want but-being an engineer rather than musician-he was wrong about. And sometimes these things stayed in production for a surprising amount of time since they didn’t interfere with the functionality enough or at all. I’m wondering if the grip orientation on this dagger might be something similar. The creator didn’t know that he was putting the grip on oddly, but his customers didn’t care that much since it is still functional if a bit odd.
That is actually pretty damned insightful.
Considering these were for using close up and personal in plate armour, would a "horizontal" blade relative to the hand have been more effective when forcing the point between plates of armour - sliding flat up one and under t'other?
Peening the first disk and than braising the second one on is possible but you will burn the wood...
The other option Tod said sounds more likely to me. Two overlapping half tang's (one pre fixed to the blade and the other pre fixed to the pommel) than held together by the rivit, but that raises questions of mechanical strength...
See the pinned comment, but yes I agree, but if the tang was like a channel or a tube that could work. Damn hard way to make a knife though for what purpose except keep guys 600 years later guessing
Could it not be soldered on with lead instead of brazed? That would lower the temperature and maybe the wood would not burn. Although I still cannot imagine how to do that with medieval technology.
@@tods_workshop sometimes someone does something solely to prove that it can be done :)
Excellent work, Tod, and Thank You to Dr. Capwell, you are a treasure and so very generous with your expertise of the collection.
I see we all had the same idea for the pinning between the two rondels, but as you need to heat the rondels to braze them, for sure it could damage the wood handle.
Then I thought "look at this big cracking at the center of the handle just under the initial brass plate location. Could the handle have been made as two halves, finely glued together and maintened with the brass flower rivet?", but of course you could not put in place the brasse pieces in the dovetails by doing that.
It is pretty enigmatic!
Medieval Cinematic Universe crossovers are always a welcome sight on my subscription feed.
5:33 its as usable today as it was 600 years ago. Toby gripping the dagger with malicious intent.
You gentlemen are so lucky to be able to work and go to this museum anytime you want.
Tod is an actual Cutler! Excellent work.
Yes, hence the name of one of his companies, Tod Cutler!
Always great to have Dr Toby Capwell in your videos, he is as passionate as you and the exchange between the too of you is super interesting.
Thanks
These comparisons of your copies with the originals geek me out with noticing construction details that make us wonder "how did they *do* that?"
Theory on the construction, not sure how plausible it is:
There's actually two tangs, one from the blade, the other brazed in between the two caps on the rondel end, letting you have the completely smooth top. They sit next to each other inside the wooden part, and there is a hole in each one where those brass florets are hiding a pin to go through the whole thing. Misalign those holes slightly and you can get those two inner tangs both under a bit of pre-stress that will keep things from going anywhere when you hit the pommel.
Wonderful to see the original A726. Is it just me or did the questions of construction, type of wood, etc. seem to resonate withToby's own curiosity? I'd love to see that work done.
I don't know what I like more, the video itself or your excitement!
It’s great that collections exist that enable people to see the real deal.
Assembly suggestion: The pommel end could possibly be brazed/soldered on by heating the end cup first. With it's opposite part already peened to the tang and tinned, that assembly could be lowered onto the end cup with minimal heating to the woodwork. The join would not be as strong that way, but as it would not be load-bearing it should suffice.
I suspect the cross pin and decorative rivet would be to prevent rotation of the wooden handle around the tang.
Keep 'em coming! - Vik
I would like to see that technique, as only way to heat metal was with the heat of forge. No fancy and precise torches. And for brazing to work, both touching metal must be at brazing temperatures. Those are far above burning point for wood. This technique would work, though, if only soft soldering was used, as far lower temperatures are used.
The last time I was in London, the Wallace collection was one of my favorite things to see tbh
seems to me the 90 degree edge alignment offset would be so it would slip through gaps in armor without too much thought. Grab and poke, this way it would align with gaps of the upper body more quickly.
I agree. Since many of the gaps in the neck/face area tend to be horizontal, being able to stab trough them with an ice pick style grip, without having to twist your hand quite as much or at all, seems like a great way to deliver more force and with less thought necessary since your blade is allready mostly aligned with the eye slit for example
After watching your video on making your version, and seeing the original. I'm quite impressed with both. That original is absolutely stunning. The craftsmanship of these old weapons always surprises me.
Thank you , Tod .
🐺
Am I the only one who finds Toby's voice incredibly soothing?
Always great to see Toby on the channel.
Cant wait for part 3, its been very enjoyable so far.
Hi Tod, I am not as experienced and good knifemaker as you, but since watching this I've been thinking about how I would make a rondel with hidden peen and I think I have found a way it might have been done even with medieval technology (I haven't tested it in my workshop yet, I will if I get the time).
1) Braze the rondel before assembly just as you have done, but with the outer dish without a hole.
2) Cut the end of the tang to length so that when it is all assembled, there is no play left.
3) Cut the end of the tang lengthwise for a few mm - the length that it will be inserted into the rondel.
4) Make a small steel vedge so that when inserted into the cut of the tang it would spread the forked ends to a width ~ 1 mm more than the hole in the tang.
5) Put the vedge into the forked end of the tang, put the rondel over it, and hammer it down. The vedge spreads the fork so it locks tightly the whole assembly together just like a peened rivet would.
Yes, could do. But.... first, it's likely without bonding like brazing the wedge in place, it would eventually rattle loose. Second, it would be easier and more efficient to just hammer over, in opposite directions, the two parts of the fork. Sort of a "T" rivet head, rather than Tod's circumferential peening. And the issue still exists of the brazing on the other half of the rondel without burning the wood. :)
This is turning into a great segment: the making it and then the comparing it to the original piece and later on the testing.
More Wallace collection and more Dr. Tobias!
The Caucasian Qama dagger is primarily used for thrusting sideways (blade parallel to the ground). This way it can better penetrate the torso without getting caught up between the ribs. That dagger doesn't have 90º handle, but they optimized the grip by having tall rivet at the pommel for the thumb to press against. Provided how thick the blade is on this rondel, it can be operated sideways without any issues.
Given that this rondal dagger was likely for armoured opponents it is more probably rotated to align with gaps between plates, maille or eye slits. In my uneducated opinion.
Based instead on this Tod, Matt and Lindy shouting "CONTEXT" inside my noggin.
your videos just make my life so much better. thank you Tod
Thinking of the rear rondel without the visible rivet. It seems to me that rather then attaching the two sides of the rondel and then riveting it to the dagger, they would have riveted the plate closer to the hand to the dagger and then used clamps to hold the back plate in position while they permanently attached the two plates together which would leave the River hidden I. The middle of the rondel
I got my Tod's Workshop rondel dagger today, about an hour after the video published. Love it. Tod, maybe Matt Easton might have a reason the grip is "off"?
I have an idea on how the end cap roundel was put on. But it would be impossible to tell without an x-ray. If we consider it most likely being French there is a fair chance the handle while it appears solid is not, and in fact the surviving brass strip is a cap that sandwiches the tang, and the brass inlay that was dovetailed in was to conceal this fact, and eventually fell off as unlike the other it was not secured with the through rivet. This would allow for the handle to be secured after the roundels were braised.
@tod’s workshop to clarify what I’m on about the wood is one piece still but it’s got a slot cut.
really cool series, thanks for putting all the additional work into it.
As a knife maker I would love to get a higher level of detail. Things like stock thickness and details about blade geometry. I would love to know more about construction.
I assume that the pommel was brazed on. I believe they had the ability to do that with bronze or other non ferris.
The only reason I can think of that is non decorative for the brass decoration mid handle would be to pin it. I could see that if you do the peen so that it can't be tightened then there could be a need to make sure the handle stayed firm if the wood contracted and a single pin would fix it firmly in place. I don't know how the handles were normally constructed but if the super guard was compressed somewhat it would be able to ride with the expansion and contraction. Perhaps this was the reason for the meathod given that there would be a fair bit of movement.
Considering that the wooden grip is made out of a solid piece, I don't think it would be possible to braze the rondel with the grip on, it would completely burn both on the outer and the inner side facing the tang
I'm assuming the rivet on the rear rondel is inside the rondel, and the braze it after the rivet is created internally -- that would make the bottom rondel's bond much weaker, however, so I'm not sure what constructional benefit that would give.
And, as for the sideways grip, perhaps there is some advantage to the sideways blade at slipping between the gaps in armor. Particularly, I'm thinking of the horizontal eye-slits of period helmets, and the gap at the hips and waist of a breastplate where even a slender/vertical blade might snag and not penetrate.
The constructional benefit would be not loading the outside disc of the rondel. If you peen the lower disc, there's no gap that could collapse. But if you peen on the outside of the pommel rondel, should the occasion arise that the created cavity collapses, either the braze weld gives way on the disks, or the disks themselves deform, the grip would instantly become loose.
Fantastic!
Just watched the first part of this yesterday and then I discover this when I log on today, you love to see it!
On the edge alignment and the handle shape being off. I think that possibly with rondels being used to get between plates of armor having the flat aligned with your arm would aid in being able to pry into an opening having it be a more effective lever.
Regarding the 90° rotation of the blade, could it have to do with how to best get into armour gaps, and in particular into a visor (just as some rapier systems prefer to lay the edges horizontal rather than vertical because it penetrates better between ribs)?
As always, I love a little mystery in history.
It would be interesting to see if it was perhaps formed initially from forging. As if its a nail construction then domed, though that may have been far too complex especially back that.
Maybe the edge is turned 90° to the grip in order to line it up with the opening in a visor of a helmet? I feel even the space between armor plates tends to be horizontal compared to the wielder of the dagger.
maybe the 90-degree angle to the blade is for getting in the gaps of the armor easier. The flat can more easily get in the overlapping plates or some such
Loved this ! Thank you for making this wonderful episode !
You guys in Europe are so lucky to have the Wallace collection on your doorstep.
And to be honest so many others too. The Wallace is amazing, but it is not unique in being amazing for stuff like this
@@tods_workshop True, I visited the tower of London before the millennium, I think it was anyway. Blown away by the set of elephant armour. We have some decent collections of fairly modern stuff here in Australia, the Armour collection in Queensland is pretty awesome if you're interested in tanks, but next to nothing over 150 years old apart from some very interesting Aboriginal items and art works, some even 40,000 years old...
Could the cutting edge orientation be set so that the back of the blade could parry? Also perhaps the tang rivet is on the inside of the lens and then was brazed together. Interesting video and beautiful work. Thank you.
With regards the alignment of blade and hand hold, maybe it was done like that to make it easier to stick through vision slits on a visor?
If you're using a fist strike with the blade coming out the base of the hand and edges in line with the fist, you'd normally need to crank at the wrist a bit for it to run through the vior. But if the blade is as it is on A726, then you could keep your wrist straight. Don't know how much of an advantage that is, but just a thought.
Todd, lovely video. As has become your trademark. The floral washers and rivet - an idea. Linked to the grip being 90 deg out of true. Could the handle have been set as you did but later found to rotate? The only way to fix it would have been to rivet through the handle and tang. But, with the decorative brass strips already in place, and dovetailed in, the bladesmith did a best-can-do by riveting through the widest part of the grip and through the flat of the tang. The floral washers don't really match with the dagger design but distract from the now awkward orientation of the grip to blade. ???????? Looking at it that way the whole dagger those washers look even more out of place. ???????
Loving this series!!!! Great work, gentlemen!
In regards to the alignment of the grip, what about how gloves or gauntlets may alter the way it would need to sit in the hand?
On the medieval one they peened the first piece onto the tang then brazed the second piece over that and cleaned it up. I've used a variation of that assembly on cooking knives I've made. I prefer to forge weld than braze but when you are joining large regions, it's very strong.
About 7:46 discussion on blade alignment. Would it align better if the owner were left handed?
What a mysterious and interesting piece. I bet your viewers would be happy to donate to the Museum to fund the X-ray and other analyses of it. My immediate thought was that the handle is a retrofit or requested change. It seems unlikely that any craftsperson is going to accidentally put the handle on that way, 90 degrees off edge alignment. And it seems unlikely that they'd just make a weird, undesirable piece to have on the shelf for someone to buy. But supposed the eventual dagger owner asked for the handle to be modified to have it rotated out of some personal battlefield preference. Presuming it was made normally with the tang peened on the back rondel like Tod did, the tang would be too short to fit the hand after removing the back rondel. So, the craftsman makes a second tang to re-extend the length, peens it in before brazing the back rondel together, and then grinds and joins the two inside the handle with that fleureted rivet.
Interesting. I would try it with several period gloves including metal ones to see how that handle works with them.
The joining with the rivet is interesting too, but honestly does not seem very secure or stable with just one rivet.
I started my rondel, it’s got synthetic handle materials though. It’s gonna be in some rough places and I just want as little oxidation on it as possible so the only metal parts will be the blade and pommel nut.
I wonder if the grip is 90° off what we would expect because it worked better with the particular gauntlets the original owner wore.
I believe they have leather on the palms and fingers gloves with padding then armour on the back of your hand . The hole catching the sword in your hand thing is Hollywood.
@@elbowomar2430 I know that. I was thinking about how with some gauntlets, plate mitten gauntlets in particular, your grip can get a little weird depending on how the plates over your thumb and back of hand are shaped. Years ago an old friend of mine was testing a pair of mitten gauntlets for an armorer he knew and found that while they worked great with his spear and ok with his poleaxe they were almost useless with his sword. Because of how the plates interacted and the shape of his sword grip he couldn't get a secure grip on it like he could with the round spear shaft and blockier. poleaxe.
Maybe they had no gauntlets or tiny tiny hands . Could be a archers knife increased protection compared to a cross guard or he had a basket hilted sword no room for gauntlets in them.
My question is were all rondel daggers handles put on as you say 90 degrees to the blade or just this one
This is the only one I have seen, though there is a really odd one in the Museum of London, that sort of does
seems there is always more to learn. thank you for sharing.
It's possible that the final dome was brazed on after the half below it was peened. other than for looks, I have no idea why they would do it that way, though.
As for the grip, I had a thought as to why the orientation is off. Could it have anything to do with how the blade would rest when gripped in an armored mitt? Barehanded it might seem backwards, but depending on exactly what sort of hand protection the owner wore, it might fit more naturally and snugly that way.
I wonder if the grip shape would fit better (for edge alignment) with heavy gauntlets. The bulk might make a odd shape more appealing.
Great video, superb craftsmanship.
In the subject of the grip and blade configuration, the simplest answer for that seems to be, this way the spine of the blade, the only part that can be banged on all day long, is naturally pointed against opponent's attack angles. I thing this is the only/primary reason, why the blade and grip ware been done this way.
I first saw the full "Making of" video and now this, "The Comparison". Thus eagerly waiting for part 3 - "The X-ray and wood analysis" and part 4 - "The Proper Stabby Test" (with the new version of course). Also, I wonder what the weight difference between those might be and what (if anything) that might tell about materials and the effects of centuries of corrosion.
Both are beautiful. I liked the daggers too.
Regarding the pommel/base plate not having evidence of attachment, is it possible that the blade and base plate are one piece? with the hilt and guard fixed on later/accessory?
My theory is, that because you both described it to be more comfortable with the reverse grip, that maybe there was more focus on building it from the base-plate downwards towards the blade, therefore the handle/grip and guard being accessories rather than being central to the operation of the dagger, as it's not a typical double-edged parrying or sidearm blade.
Given how the dagger was supposedly hammer-fisted between metal and flesh, I would assume it's structural strength would need to "flow" from the plate through to the end of the blade, which is why you don't see any form of attachment at the now upward-facing base-plate. Plus maybe bare-hammering it with your hand would incur some tearing on your skin if there was any metallic protrusion or cut-away.
How they attached the hilt/handle and guard is beyond me as I'm not a blacksmith, I'm assuming there could be some process where heating the guard to expand to fit, would allow it to coll and squeeze on indefinitely. I'm not sure if that would support hammering into someones arm pit or whatever, but maybe the brunt of the force is borne by the base plate.
Im thinking the offset of the blade to handle is for a few reasons: 1 When leaning over someone you have more side to side stability than forward and backwards, so getting the blade to 'bite'/puncture in a fashion that helps with forward and backwards stability makes sense; 2 I imagine that a sideways blade is more likely to slip to the side rather that forward or backwards, so less likely to throw off your balance in a dramatic fashion, and probably reduces the chance of stabbing yourself, 3 extending from the slipping concept, it seems likely that they would have the sharpened edge facing away from the 'steering' arm, allowing the 'driving' arms force to be delivered more down the spine of the blade not the edge of the blade, I'm thinking this would increase the chance of the blade puncturing the armour and not glancing off.
After reading some commenters' suggestions, I'm going to guess it's attached like a wedged tendon joint over the inner disc of the pommel, to avoid the high heat needed for peening. And then maybe the wood handle is wrapped with a cloth that's kept wet during the brazing of the outer disc to keep it from burning.
Could the florets be there to pin and sandwich the handle, where I know it's one piece, but to press the handle perpendicular to the grain? To prevent splitting?
Could the guard's two-dish construction have allowed it to compress a little in a strike, absorbing some shock?
Thoughts on why the blade is 90 degrees to the grip:
It would be a more comfortable neutral grip when trying to stab through an eyeslot.
All about ergonomics and efficiency. If you have a knight in full armor on their back, the eye is a quick target to finish the job. But the slot runs horizontal to a conventional blade/tang grip direction. Thoughtful craftsmanship
I believe the reason why the blade is turned to the side when its held by the handle is because the joints, the eyeholes and those types of items were horizontal, so by having the blade turned to the side when it was being held properly it was a way of helping ensure it was more effective on the areas it would be used to attack.
Looking at how the blade appears oddly rotated to have the blade to the side... Would it make sense that it's deliberately facing "inwards" for a right handed person striking, the slight angle of strike will be slightly from outward in; which would drive well into an armpit or under up and in on an upward strike, conversely down at a very slight angle into the neck joint with an ice pick grip strike?
With respect to the upper rondel, is it possible they braised a threaded nut internally and screwed it onto a threaded tang? This is a modern construction technique. I don't know if they used it in the middle ages.
It could be and yes they could have done, just never seen it and would expect some movement, but yes possible - thanks
OK, really out there for the upper rondel: What if it isn't a separate piece? Perhaps they just made a really long tang, and then made it out of the extra material, similar to how nails used to be made.
EDIT: Then we have the problem of how to get the bottom rondel on, but if it was slid down the tang before the top was made?
I'd really love to see an x-ray of that thing!
Great video and always great to see Toby Capwell give his thoughts. On usage and ownership, one point in particular struck me. The handle is tight, on both yours and Toby's hand, as you say it rightly should be. But how would that fit with a plate gauntlet? Would be an interesting exercise to see whether there isbany difference between armoured and unarmoured fit, and then to usability differences between the two? And whilst clearly a military weapon designed to winkle through weak points and be hammered in with heel of a palm, a look at fit between armoured and unarmoured fist may go some way to answering the usage question - was this a belt hanger for an unarmoured noble at rest (hence the fancy florets and brass work) or rather a fancy looking killing blade.
Watch the next one.....
I assume the end disc may have been fit together of it's two plates around the rivet.
the blade going sideways(by comfort of the grip) could possibly be to position the blade to better slip between sections of plates of the armor? Or even to make it easier to twist the blade in an effort to pry the plates apart while in a join(and better get through the underlying gambeson{and a potentally chainmaile layer}. Similar to an oyster shucker working his tool between the shell halves and severing the muscle inside-all is needed is a thin gap and leverage..
Always lovely to see Toby on the channel! Very curious to see the pommel not having a visible peen. Even the explanation of there being "tangs" for the pommel-rondels and then the rivet being functional rather than decorative seems odd to me. I cannot imagine forgewelding a strip of iron on the inside of the pommel or even brazing it would be very easy, and then not only burning the blade tang on, but then also the pommel's tang. It seems awfully convoluted for something which you have done in a method tried and tested for centuries and more! Very curious. An Xray would be amazing to see. Looking forward to the testing!
I agree with all of that - possible, but why?
i hope they can scan it to find out. my guess is the bottom rondel has some sort of sleeve or bracket which interfaces with the blade tang and the grip covers this. either that or it must screw on somehow but that would seem to be less secure and surely a threaded screw system would have loosened up after all these years.
I don't know if this is feasible, either today or back then, but what came to my head when I saw the pommel disk is, what if they first pinned the bottom half of the disk, and THEN brazed the upper part? Sounds awfully more complicated, but as I see it, even if the pommel disk flattens a bit with use, it would remain thight.
Would the grip feel more comfortable or just different while wearing gauntlets?
Tod, for the back rondel might they have riveted on the inner disk of the rondel on first, and then braised the out disk in place to hide where that rondel attaches inside the rondel disk? Just a thought.
Ah, seems I should have read the earlier comments first. Alas, it’s a mystery.
I'm curious about the distance between the rondels. In the video your hand fits snugly but surely a knight in armour would be wearing quite thick gloves of some sort. So wouldn't this make the space too small for a gloved hand?
An interesting disscusion,maybe you could ask if they would X-ray some of the collection?
Just an odd thought but could you form the head/handle like a large headed nail and fasten it into the handle by the florrets?
Yes you could braze it on when finished. And the wood could be two pieces. When we cut wood today the saw removes some wood making seams obvious, BUT in medieval times they would split the wood allowing for a seamless look. In this case it is a two pice handle and you can see the seam under the missing brass plate and the construction of peening only the inner disk with washer is stronger than going through both due to the ability for the disk to collapse. It’s just common sense for the handy.
Tod didn’t follow the proper build procedures using split handle.
About the angle of the handle, I watched a documentary about ww2 daggers and the thumb grove on the blade to make sure you used them sideways to slip between ribs. Just my thought maybe it was easier to do so for armor and that dagger.
You can wrap the grip in a wet cloth and braze the top disk on by setting it on a charcoal block and braze with a blowpipe and snips of solder sandwiched between the disks and wire the assembly together with copper wire temporarily, the way jewelers still braze and solder at the bench.
I can confirm from riveting aircraft that you absolutely will see the rivets against the metal, if a rivet was there.
For example, a bare metal P-51 Mustang. You can see every single rivet on that wing, but they are all countersunk and shaved flush, and then the whole wing polished with Fuller's Earth. You can run your hands across the wing and not feel a single rivet, but you can see them from 50 feet away.
Could the strange handle position with the edge and back of the blade pointing to the sides hint top the handling in "half grip" where the left hand gips the blade? Tried it with my dagger that way and it give a relaxed and straight wrist for the left hand.
My bet is that the bottom is just screwed down with some locktite on the threads. It's probably joined by the base slipping over the top and then as you suggested the decorative piece hides the bolt.