[Alec Cawdor]

RE: Baselards, Rondels and Bollock Daggers....

What are the advantages and disadvantages of each?
Were any particularly better at certain tasks which the others were not?

Performance, specific purpose, penetration, cutting ability, mobility, agility, balance, multi-function, preferred grip, etc....

Basically, I just want to open a discussion comparing each of these daggers and see some examples if anyone has some good pictures. :-)

[Gregg Sobocinski]

My first reaction was to point out what you probably already know, which is that daggers classified by those names can vary to an extreme amount with blade shape and size, as well as handle shape, material, and size. But I believe there are enough common styles for each type, that you might get some interesting comparisons from those who collect daggers.

I look forward to seeing those responses.

[Craig Peters]

Alec,

The tricky thing about your question is that it assumes there are specific characteristics distinctive to, and unique to, each dagger type. The reality is that the difference between each type is more visual and cosmetic, because it's the hilt furnishings that determine what kind of dagger it is.

Many of the qualities you refer to are difficult to measure or quantity in an absolute sense. How well the dagger performs is largely a function of the blade mounted. So there may be differences between say a single and double-edged blade, or based upon blade length. But how do you qualify whether a double edged rondel is better than a double edged basilard? For that matter, how do we speak of which one is better, given that there are many individual rondels and basilards- which specimens can best represent the category of "rondel" and "basilard"?

In modern times, we like to dissect things by looking at a great variety of specific characteristics. Yet this tendency can cause us to seek for distinctions that cannot easily be quantified. It can also assume that things fit into discrete, non-overlapping categories, which is not the case. Ultimately, I think it's more fruitful to pursue the characteristics of an individual dagger, rather than comparing dagger "species" in the abstract.

[Chad Arnow]

Alec,
That's going to be tough to answer, as there is so much variation. Those terms (ballock, rondel, baselard, etc.) refer to hilt shapes, of course. Single edged blades are found on rondel, ballock, and baselard hilts, as are double edged blades of various sections. Blades vary widely and all the common blade forms are found on all those types.

So that takes us to the hilt and how it impacts things. But there's tons of variety there, too, in materials, size and shape. Here are two ballock daggers from my collection. Their shapes, sizes, proportions, blade sections etc. are nothing alike, but both are accurate representations of historical pieces.



Or these two rondels, with big differences, again from my collection:



It's really going to come down to individual pieces more than anything or general preferences for the hilt shapes. There's no neat and tidy comparison, since there're so much overlap between them all.