[Chad Arnow]

Most folks are familiar with single-edged triangular section blades. But there are also some daggers with double-edged blades with triangular cross-sections (see crude attached depiction). Some of these have a fuller or two on the same face as the mid rib (top of my image). What's on the back side (bottom)? Is it also fullered or is it flat or concave or something else?

[Eric W. Norenberg]

Hi Chad,
Have you seen items of this design that are in our focus time period? I've handled a few modern daggers that were hollow ground on the "back", and I believe some of Michael Pearce's tactical blades have zones where the blade's cross-section is flat on the back just as you've illustrated. I've never knowingly seen a historical blade like that, I'd be interested to learn that there were 'tho.

[Chad Arnow]

[Pierre T.]

Silly question - how do you know the cross section is triangular if you haven't seen the back of the blade?

cheers,

Pierre

[Chad Arnow]

[Pierre T.]

Ah I see, thanks.

I have no idea, but it's certainly a very valid question to be asking. Would it be possible to send a message of some sort to the museum and ask?

cheers,

[Chad Arnow]

[Peter Johnsson]

Chad, from what I´ve seen I think that those short and wide basilards with triangular sectioned blades tend to have flat back sides.
Some later period triangular sectioned daggers I´ve seen have had all bevels hollow ground. hey tend not to be symmetrical triangles in section, but have wide back, and one bevel narrower than the other on the front. Same diameter for hollow grinding is used for all bevel, I believe.

Mind you, I have only seen a handful of these blades first hand. There is probably variation to be found in the material.

[Chad Arnow]

[Peter Johnsson]

From what I remember, they are flat on the back side, even if fullered on the front side.


- Hmmm.
As I write this I get uncertainall of a sudden.
I must go check to make sure.
What is the flat back, may have a very shallow hollow grind from edge to edge. Very shallow: 1 mm deep or so.

I must also double check on the fullers.

Sorry.

I thought I knew.

Back to square one.
<:-/

[W. Knight]

I have a silly question also.

I'm wondering why the fullers would not be included in the cross section drawings in the catalog?

Here's some quick drawings I did of the cross sections of three of my swords:



The first is of very flattened diamond cross section, the second the sort of flattened oval with single, wide shallow fuller, and the third of very beefy oval cross section with two parallel fullers running about two thirds of its length. These are just crude drawings, but the fullers are such important parts of the cross section that without them the drawings are woefully inadequate. The first has no indentations and just lines, because it has no fullers and the other two, without the indentations would misrepresent the actual cross section of the blades.

So my silly question, better stated, would be: How can a museum catalog justify not including such important features as fullers in cross sectional drawings when these features are of the profoundest importance in any cross section of a sword blade?

[Chad Arnow]

[Michal Plezia]

[Chad Arnow]

[Chad Arnow]

[Markus Nußbaumer]

Hello Chad,

I had the opportunity to pay a visit to the Reichsstadtmuseum Rothenburg ob der Tauber. There were two Basilards with a triangular blade on display in the glass cases, and if you got dowm on your knees you could see the flat side of the blade. They are really just flat, plain steel, no fuller, no decoration, as Peter said.
I tried to take pictures thinking of your question, but they are not very good, sorry for that.
An interesting detail, I think, is that the upper (?) guard is similarly shaped as the blade, somehow flattened on one edge.
I hope this is helpful.

Kind regards,

Markus

[Christopher Gregg]

Chad, I have a small modern dagger with double edges, but three sides. No fullers, though. All three sides are deeply hollow ground. I think it's a Fury brand knife.

[Chad Arnow]

Markus,
Thanks for these pics. Do you know the dating on these and if they fit the late 13th-early 14th century date range I'm looking at?

[Markus Nußbaumer]

Hello Chad,

The Museum dates them to the early 16th century, but there are other items on display which are - in my opinion - not dated correctly. For example, the sword below is dated 1150 to 1225, but the thrusting orientated blade style suggests a later date, I suppose (please correct me if I am wrong).
So, if you ask me, these daggers may well be 14th century, concerning similarities to other examples of basilards in various museums (Zürich, for example. And there is a huge ring hilted dagger/basilard found in the ruins of Tannenberg Castle which was destroyed in 1399, with the same style of cross guard). But I am not an expert.

Best wishes,

Markus

[Markus Nußbaumer]

Hello Chad,

I remembered that I had another report of one dagger wich probably has a triangular cross section somethere in my computer. It is - or was - in the Deutsches Historisches Museum in Berlin, but not on display. I have one picture and a description, that approximately translates as follows:

"Double edged blade with a central ridge on one side, which transforms into a plane surface in the upper half of the blade."

The dagger is dated to the 14th century. And a ridge on only one side. I hope this will be helpful.

Kind regards,

Mark