Or they where just not added to the drawings. Kind of like scabards. Or they could be carried under the tunic, like the money purse...
Most pre-14th century effigies don't illustrate a dagger being worn. Let's not fixate too much on one resource.
| Patrick Kelly wrote: |
| I have been told that the cross-hilted daggers we medieval enthusiasts love so much were somewhat of a rare thing, with the ballock knife actually being far more common. Peter Johnsson has told me that nearly all of the originals he has examined have been single edged.
|
Interesting, and this points toward (egregious pun) a notion that has been growing on me: that large knives, suitable for fighting or utility, would have been much more common than cross-hilted daggers dedicated to fighting, due to their edge geometry.
As many in today's industry have pointed out, it's almost as expensive to make a cross-hilted dagger --akin to a miniature sword -- as it is to make a sword. You may be using a lot less steel, and less labor for the blade, but just as much labor on the cutler's end.
A good, stout, single-edged knife with a rigid blade and sharp point, with a pressed/glued/riveted handle, is just as effective in combat, far cheaper to make, and better suited for utility tasks. Perhaps the cross-hilted dagger was more of a luxury item. I do think everyone would have had a knife of some sort, but probably not a dagger, per se.
Coulda been a simple matter of economics... :D
Worth noting, also, that many cross-hilted daggers were also single-edged, according to Oakeshott...
Maybe a lot of those early single edged daggers were descendant of the earlier Sax ?
Also I can't help seeing the Sax as very close in shape and function to a Bowie knife with stylistic period differences.
Also I can't help seeing the Sax as very close in shape and function to a Bowie knife with stylistic period differences.
Yes, I think the descendants of the seax have been with us continually for the last 1000 years!
The advantage of a single edge is that you can apply your thumb to the back of the blade, making a much more usefull tool. The same cannot be said for a double edged dagger. I would imagine that a well designed single edged dagger would be just about as effective in combat as a double edged.
| Geoffrey H wrote: |
| The advantage of a single edge is that you can apply your thumb to the back of the blade, making a much more usefull tool. The same cannot be said for a double edged dagger. I would imagine that a well designed single edged dagger would be just about as effective in combat as a double edged. |
A double-edged blade might have a slight edge (hah!) over a single-edged one in penetration on a thrust or stab. A false-edged one, on the other hand, combines the best points (double hah!) of both.
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum