Medieval Dagger vs Armor with Tod: Additional Thoughts

Tod's Workshop video: • Testing a medieval ant...
Tod and I tested a medieval rondel dagger replica against 'armor' and were shocked. In this video I answer some of the questions that came up under his video.
3 extra videos each month on Patreon, which hugely helps support this channel:
/ scholagladiatoria
Facebook & Twitter updates, info and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfightinglondon.com
Matt Easton's website & Pinterest:
www.matt-easton.co.uk/
www.pinterest.co.uk/matt_east...
Easton Antique Arms:
www.antique-swords.co.uk/

[@tods_workshop]

HI Guys - so sorry I am so late to the party and Matt this is a great film, following on from the fun we had and really highlights some of our thoughts and the comments from all you guys. As you are aware neither Matt or or I script or particularly plan our films other than we want to cover a few points. This film and what happened was very surprising to both of us and I think that threw us off coherent thought a little and rather than standing back and thinking about what to do next in reaction to what happened, we did a bit more then concluded. Clearly there are so many points to consider and address that I think we need to come back for a part 2. Not that I have asked Matt yet, but I suspect he will be willing! So get your suggestions in to either Matt or I and we will put another together. For my part I want to test multiple layers, thicker armour pieces and a dynamic target that moves when struck . When it comes to flat samples, although they don't reflect real armour, they do allow for consistent sample comparison of one material type to another.

[@UserNamechannel]

Hey Tod. Would love to see a test on "work-hardened" mild steel, even if a flat plate. Simply mild steel that's been hammered (cold) a hundred or more times.

[@UserNamechannel]

Also, do be careful about safety concerns in the next video! The dagger can certainly slip off a plate and cause injury to the user.

[@Tennouseijin]

One thing that could be tested is if hitting a bone after piercing the armor would make a difference. I suspect without armor, the dagger could easily go through a skull, a rib, or any other bone. However, piercing armor would take away some momentum and maybe, similar how the table can ultimately stop further penetration, bone - softer than steel, but also thicker - might also be able to vastly reduce penetration depth?

[@leonidasperea6849]

You make awesome daggers, friend!

[@oliversmith8925]

Please add Kevlar to the test (obviously not historic) … but very interesting … I’m sure someone could rustle up (donate) some modern armour for the test.

[@999wilf999]

I think it's clear that, for full protection, we need armour made of tables.

[@he1ar1]

Wooden table armour

[@littlekong7685]

It works for shields, and it worked for ancient medieval fortress doors against WW2 siege artillery. Stick beats blade many times.

[@leoprzytuac3660]

You made me laugh out loud XD

[@LarryGarfieldCrell]

Wood armor used to exist, thousands of years ago. Seems they were on to something. :-)

[@LoneReaper019]

This will take table top rpgs to a whole new level

[@zetheros8627]

As a former armoursmith / armchair expert & fedora enjoyer; unworked, 1.2mm/18ga. mild steel plate straight from the steel mill is very easy to puncture, you could probably gouge it with a sharpened stick. It's thin, soft, and fairly easy to bend with bare hands. For more accurate results if you guys want to test this next time, Todd could planish the plates. This introduces concentric patterns of stresses in the crystalline structure; essentially work-hardening. This would give a much better analogue to plate, and is very easy to set up. Just smack the plate around on an anvil a few dozen times in an overlapping pattern. I think you'll find that this makes the plate much, much harder to puncture. Doesn't require any fancy carbon steel or heat treatment. Alongside rolled edges, dishing and raising, planishing is an integral part of why plate armour is so tough. Planishing does naturally introduce some curvature to the plate, so if you want to test the strength of work-hardening and not curvature, you can flip the plate over and flatten it a bit on the other side, though being careful not to over-planish the steel, as overworked steel becomes brittle and more prone to stress fractures. However, a good armoursmith tries to gives every plate or lame some curvature, even if it's miniscule, this small geometric change is too big of a benefit to not have. It aids in articulation too; where craftsmanship becomes so good there are virtually no gaps in articulation, and the armour articulates like the strap of a fine wristwatch. You can see a lot of examples of this in later period armours with compression articulations in the back of poleyns, Maximilian sabatons, wrists of gauntlets, etc.

[@TheBaconWizard]

As discussed in the original video, while there are plenty of instances where plate armour would have been better protection, there are also brigandines and jacks where it was thinner and no harder and just as flat.

[@zetheros8627]

@@TheBaconWizard brigandine lames would still be planished

[@scholagladiatoria]

It's an interesting idea. Certainly, work hardening makes mild steel more resistant to deformation, but I am not at all sure that it makes it more resistant to penetration. It can certainly be tested!

[@zetheros8627]

@@scholagladiatoria doo eett :D huge fan btw. I've learned a lot from your channel and it's gone on to make better weapons in video games.

[@willek1335]

@@zetheros8627 Former? Hmm? Show us what you mean.

[@breaden4381]

Years ago skallagrim stabbed some mild steel helmets with a rondel dagger and it just glanced off. Curvature and work hardening are super important.

[@mysticonthehill]

Yes I was going to comment his too. It just illustrated how important recreate accurately the materials. Archeologically the only example example I know of plate being penetrated by a non powder weapon, is a helmet in Eastern Europe. I cannot remember the country. It which seemingly was penetrated with either a two handed hammer spike of another pole weapon spike.

[@KurNorock]

Mild steel doesn't work harden.

[@FaceJP24]

Skallagrim actually commented on the Tod's Workshop video saying this: "It also shows the difference that reproduction quality makes. I did some tests with a $60 rondel dagger a few years ago, and it did nowhere near as well. Blade profile matters a lot."

[@bmxriderforlife1234]

@@mysticonthehill there's actually a few examples. It's not as rare as you'd think. But often also not on the best qualities of armor. Weapons more often got the best steel. It's simple science. With a good blow and the right concentration of the power. It's which material is thicker stronger and harder. As well as how much load exists.

[@Robert399]

As impressive as the test results were, it's important to remember that treatises (whether it's with daggers, longswords or the ends of pollaxes) advised wrestling, levering and stabbing into gaps. Whatever our tests show, if it were that easy to stab through the armour, medieval people wouldn't have bothered with any of these techniques and the treatises would have just said, "thrust hard at the upper torso."

[@adminaccount5274]

Tod here - I wholly agree. This indicates what can happen and is fascinating, but is very much not a demonstration that all armour is useless and to be fair that is also not what we said or implied.

[@gusty9053]

The archery video shows this thoroughly. Armor works more often than not but is not invincible. As soon as the arrows struck weak points "injury" was the result.

[@colbyboucher6391]

I think it's important to remember that those treatises are all about a one-on-one duel where you're facing an opponent wholly focused on you and you only. In a scenario like that, going for a really committed full-force stab would be incredibly dangerous. And if you're on top of someone or otherwise defending yourself beyond holding a shield, it'd just be harder to do. (And as others have said properly made plate would be tougher than the wimpy sheet they used). In a skirmish full of spearpoints, stabbing-focused shortswords and men wearing old mail shirts, though... I have to imagine a lot of people were still getting stabbed in the gut.

[@Brentisimo]

I didn’t know that I needed a rondel dagger until today.

[@natetheknight]

One thing I wonder about testing more accurate mail is the shape of the ring itself. Often flat Indian mail is extremely flat, even when made from thicker wire; I have not seen historical mail that flat... I wonder how mail rings of a lenticular () shape would behave. I also don't see why people are upset that a dagger designed for penetrating mail armor is good at its job.

[@morriganmhor5078]

The question is, why wasn´t such a weapon (or sword type) developed earlier, in the time of mail?

[@natetheknight]

For one... Spears/lances did exist and daggers (although not like the rondel design.) Also in earlier eras it might be faster/easier to incapacitate people (average soldier) that are only wearing a little bit of mail via a long cutting blade. Its a complex question for sure. I dont have answers, just some thoughts.

[@natetheknight]

@@morriganmhor5078 The rondel is also a very specialized tool. Why have an armor piercing weapon if that average soldier isnt wearing armor like that... Also maybe in the 13th and 12th centuries I didn't neccesarily want to kill other knights, but ransom them. And If I did want to kill them, I did have weapons to do so.

[@commode7x]

Historical mail isn't that flat because it's not machine made with heavy amounts of perfect loops and perfect welds and perfectly made rivets. It would be mildly lumpy if made to the highest degree of handmade smithing standards of the era due to small imperfections. Imperfections that would very likely cause the mail to fail even more easily than in the test.

[@natetheknight]

@@commode7x No, one can easily make mail rings very flat with a hammer. mail is made from wire, and one can easily smooth out that wire too (to remove imperfections on the outside). Even so, yes there will be small imperfections, but I don't know if these would weaken the mail, or make it compliment it as a form of work hardening. Also indian mail is handmade to some extent too.... Im not sure how the wire or the solid rings are made, but the rings are still punched, and assembled, and riveted by hand.

[@madao7865]

Suddenly the Italian practice of wearing a full mail shirt underneath plate armor doesn't seem so redundant anymore.

[@cmdrcoyote7598]

I was going to ask if people ever wore mail under plate and you supplied the answer before i could ask -:)

[@Aserash]

The first thought I had when Tod showed how the handle was oriented, was that it lined up the blade with the eye slit of your opponent's armour. That is still what makes the most sense to me.

[@markfergerson2145]

That's an excellent, uh, point. Also, when Matt held Tod's dagger against his forearm in guard position, I noticed the edge would never be against his arm. Hence at least a secondary design consideration would be unarmored use.

[@Leo.23232]

i thought the same

[@HunterValleyDan]

Agreed.

[@Aserash]

@@markfergerson2145 That is also a good observation.

[@markfergerson2145]

@@Aserash Thank you. Both Tod and the fellow at the museum puzzled over the orientation and it bugged me ever since. I didn't clearly realize it until Matt held the ordinary rondel dagger the same way in this video.

[@simonmoorcroft1417]

The rondel dagger reminds me of a really big long bodkin arrowhead with a handle. I wonder if that was the inspiration for the rondel. Someone on the battlefield was grappling with an armoured enemy and made a "battlefield pick-up" and jammed a discarded long bodkin arrow into their opponents arm pit and thought "that worked well. Perhaps a handle may be a good idea".

[@fryeday]

Every time Tod and Matt collaborate on a video it's quality content.

[@MartinGreywolf]

I think it'd be very interesting to see the same test that was done with this rondel dagger with an earlier dagger, e.g. a quillon or even a seax. It may well be that rondel dagger isn't that much more stabby than its earlier ancestors. While we don't know if a thing called "double mail" was a thing, we do know that two layers of mail definitely were worn on at least some parts of the body - the most common one is mail coif overlapping mail shirt over the top of your chest in early and high medieval period, and even aventail of late medieval helmets could be worn over just a mail shirt. With that in mind, testing two layers of mail penetration is definitely a valid thing to do.

[@Bwaze]

Regarding blade indexing on Wallace Collection rondel dagger - what about stabbing through visor or eye-slits, or between sallet and bevor? That's one target that really prefers your blade to be horizontal rather than vertical.

[@adamcichon6957]

What if that indexing was done primarely to present the spine against opponent's attack angles? Because surely dagger will be constantly bashed on hard, but a jab through the visor is more like a lucky strike matter... is it sounds right?

[@jameslaurence6619]

The revelation of the depth of penetration is definitely a game changer. These sorts of tests are actually crucial to our understanding of medieval combat. Keep up the good work!

[@aubreymorris9183]

Rewatch Tod's arrows vs. armor series. He discovered a very noticeable difference in penetration through mail and layered fabric depending on which is on the outside. Fyi, maybe a place to start the testing process.

[@slagent]

That is a terrifying weapon, especially for something one might assume was the backup for the backup.

[@andrewstephens2687]

Agreed, but it makes sense given that rondel daggers are essentially super high-tech backup weapons. Thousands of years of real world evolution in response to thousands of years of evolving armors. In absolute terms, if you were attacked by a rondel-wielder, rondels sacrifice edge geometry for penetration which combined with length means easier to get inside of and grapple with/disarm (relatively speaking). There are always tradeoffs and everything comes with potential exploits.

[@ac1dflare937]

@@andrewstephens2687 That's the weird bit though, Rondels are the near perfect answer to mail, yet only came about nearly a thousand years later with plate. It's bizarre.

[@Lurklen]

@@ac1dflare937 Took em a long time to figure out what worked. It's not like these ancient fellows making daggers weren't smart, but they weren't scientists either. I don't think they were just experimenting with knife design to see what could defeat mail (who has the time and budget for that). They were making tools for a job, and seeing how well the thing they already made worked at it. They made their tools according to convention, and those tools were used the same way. And if you think about it, it's a weird design, a triangular blade that's quite thick. It's not something you'd do by accident, and if you do how likely are you to test that against the armour of the day. And then it's got to actually catch on enough to proliferate. Meanwhile, everyone is trying to make armour better at the same time. It's even possible someone somewhere had a similar design and it just never became popular for a variety of reasons.

[@roffels11-gamingandhistory69]

As I wrote under Tod's video: this gives me goosebumps. As I late 14th century re-enactor rondelldaggers are very interesting to me, because exactly at the time plate is put over mail and "gambesons" become even less prominent than they were before (visual evidence of them is there, but it is rare. The "normal" wool or linen clothing was the common thing, not the "gambi") these mail-killers are invented. They survive the end of the middle-ages and just changed shape a bit (italian stiletto daggers, as example)... So now I know why. XD About some comments here: You are provided with visual evidence of the daggers superiority and explanations about the quality of the materials used during this video (pseudo-medieval replica steel versus modern industrial steel). And still you guys can't accept the simple fact that rondell daggers are dangerous, no matter the armor. We got historical several depictions of armored fighters _ending_ eachother with these daggers and at least one of a group of peasants armed with daggers killing a downed knight - _pictoral historical evidence._ But sure, keep on believing armor makes you immortal. Two example I experienced myself. Consider it a little reality check: 1.) Despite me wearing a modern steel bascinet during re-enactment sessions a hit against my head hurts. A lot. Despite 2mm thick steel and a coif it hurts and is unhealthy. If I wouldn't wear my helmet I'd have had some serious injuries, sure, but I'm neither immortal nor unstoppable in it. 2.) Despite wearing riveted modern steel mail (shirt) and an anachronisticly thick gambeson (need to change that in the future) a stab with my groups blunt re-enactment weapons causes bruses, hurts a lot and cracked a rip once. This is why they are forbidden in sparring and are only trained in slow motion to learn to _deflect_ them if facing one accidentally, not use them ever. We have one in our group who uses a brigandine and, in our former group, one used full plate armor. Both still feel the pain and impact of stabs with blunted swords and daggers despite their superior armor which was thicker than most archeological findings. But sure ignore them, ignore me, ignore this test video and continue repeating your arm-chair-historian monologues instead of accepting empiric data. :>

[@perrytran9504]

I haven't gotten to do full kit HEMA yet, but I have practiced HEMA for a year now with regular sparring. I guarantee you most people who think (plate) armor makes you invulnerable have only seen some hype videos on KZbin and have never done an armored fight in their life. In fact most probably aren't even in good physical condition as anyone remotely active would realize how easy it is to get injured in the least expected ways. It's very telling that people recommend just using modern SPES equipment over historical gear if you are just doing regular HEMA since while it isn't as flashy it is designed to protect you better against repeated blunt force. Which is especially risky for the hands. That and because of how thick armor can quickly get they are probably mistaking standalone gambesons (which are quite thick) as arming doublets suitable for wear under armor (which are thin and ABSOLUTELY NOT enough to wear on their own.) Besides, historically you cannot expect any weapon designs to stick around long if they weren't immediately useful and stayed that way for a long time. And yet these armchair contrarians have deluded themselves into thinking swords (a weapon used for thousands of years in various evolutions) were rarely used because "muh armor tempered 6 million times is immune to cuts!!11!"

[@Sk0lzky]

I knew it would go through mild steel fairly easily (punched me knives through it myself many a time) but holy cow was that deep! It was like one of maybe 3 times I was rendered speechless by something online

[@ducthman4737]

So the best protection in the Middle Ages would be a wooden table. Like a shield.

[@israeltovar3513]

I would love to see combinations of armour which were used in history, from mail+gambeson, mail+leather+gambeson, plate+gambeson, plate+mail+gambeson, or the Eastern Roman Empire's cataphract's favorite, gambeson+plate(lamellar)+mail+gambeson. Great work from you and Todd, as usual!

[@joshyaks]

I'm glad you addressed the orientation of the blade vs the grip even if it left you mostly puzzled, because I've been very intrigued by that!

[@InSanic13]

Love all testing you all are doing, can't wait to see more.

[@elementzero3379]

It's great to have additional context for these tests. This has been fascinating, beginning to end. Seeing a rondel dagger headed your way must've been alarming, if not outright terrifying, regardless of your armor. We always knew their purpose, but seeing this dagger in action was amazing.

[@joeupton99]

I love when you and Todd get together and do stuff like this. Keep it up!

[@Naptosis]

What I love about the algorithm is that it recommends this video 3 weeks later.

[@FlavioLanfranconi]

I know, in japanese Iaido, that stabs to the chest are always done with a 90° turned blade in order to get in-between the ribs. It sounds extremely plausible to me (now you talked about it) that the blade-orientation has all to do with where (gaps/slits) you want your blade to fit into ..

[@ms-iz1jd]

Knives go right through ribs. Ribs aren't going to slow a knife down any recognizable amount. Ribs also don't typically bind knives up. At least I've never seen that, although I have seen other bones hold onto blades.

[@Red-jl7jj]

@@ms-iz1jd Swords, daggers, and bayonets have been noted to get stuck between the ribs historically.

[@adamcichon6957]

What if that was done primarely to present the spine against opponent's attack angles? Because that dagger was not a primary, but a support weapon, used mainly for deflecting and parrying...

[@titanscerw]

Great work on after action report, Matt!

[@squarewheels2491]

The side flat might be to help stop it from sliding across curved plate Basically, the knife bend will be in a different direction from armor's curve so it will be less likely to slide. I would like to see the dagger vs plate covering mail. The extra layers will spread out the force some and might make it a lot harder to penetrate..

[@jonasbarka]

This is my guess as well. And sliding up or down would often be better than sliding sideways. Add to that horizontal vision slits and the like. Hitting the right area would trump some extra power.

[@mattpastell3728]

I really enjoy it when you and Tod conduct your tests, as with this one the results were quite surprising!

[@jadedlotuz5095]

In the stabbing tests, nothing seams to go thrue the table or the door. So my takeaway is, that you should have Plank(Wood)-armour! Until someone brings out the axe, or battle-saw. ;) Cheers.

[@zedre7633]

All of the testing was great, as was the three-part series format and Todd's incredible work, but I for one am also glad Matt brought some of scholagladiatoria's trademark innuendo to Todd's channel. The look on his face was priceless.

[@moonasha]

8:00 one thing I'd like to add, any dents in the armor will easily catch a blade too. Not sure how often that would come into play though. If someone has been working on armor with something like a warhammer, there'd definitely be places to catch

[@shotgunridersweden]

I love the tests you did. And as i posted in the daggerforum it has forced me to reconsider my views a bit and it surprised me quite a bit actually. Things that force me to reconsider are awesome. I have zero criticism on the tests, to my mind they were all valid. Could you have tested more? Yeah, and as you said youre going to. Great job both of you!!!

[@gehrigornelas6317]

Great video and excellent experiment. Thank you for your contributions.

[@douglaslester6812]

I remember a woodcut that showed armoured combat where one combatant with a dagger grappling with an opponent while trying to shove the visor open so that he had access to his opponent's eye sockects.

[@hin_hale]

I'm thinking that the blade to handle orientation might be about the alignment of most of the gaps in a suit of plate armour. For example, stabbing upwards underneath a harness or downwards into an eye slit, it'll probably be easier to get good penetration if the blade lies flat against the edges of the plate instead of the edge cutting against them. The same goes for the potential gaps on the sides or the gaps at the shoulders. Also, you can potentially get into smaller gaps more often with that alignment. Just a thought.

[@slick_slicers]

If the blade flexes, the energy is not lost, it’s stored in the blade and released as the steel is punctured. It’s then released increasing the subsequent energy in the thrust.

[@thegreyghost2789]

The blade orientation is an interesting question and perhaps the answer lies in a combination of the factors you suggested. I know from various reenactors that during WW1 soldiers were taught to turn their rifles on the side to prevent the bayonet from sticking in the rib cage. My American civil war 2 band musket has a sword bayonet that is fitted on the side with the flat facing down for the same reason but the rondel dagger would have been used in a variety of ways so having an orientation specific for rib penetration does not seem likely. These have been an exciting an educating series and I'm looking forward to future ones.

[@anthonydevito1298]

You and Tod's collabs are just some of the best KZbin I've seen in a while. Love it! In other words....we love it when you touch wood with Tod!!!!!

[@maxcasteel2141]

Matt gets to come in for the fun part

[@andrewsock1608]

Are you saying working in Todd’s shop and standing by a window with Toby is not fun ?

[@SB-qm5wg]

Another great colab. 👏

[@jm9371]

Great Collab!....Rondel FTW. Look forward to ALL this content.

[@adambbbbbbbbbbbbb]

Its always a treat to see you touching some wood with Tod. Great videos!

[@densamme1752]

Two arguments for the horizontal alignment of the blade is 1. It might make it easier to get tru gaps in the armour especially eye slits and armour skirt or perhaps brigandine. 2. The "roundness" of a chestplate is of a lesser arc vertically than horizontal, so the risk of a flexing blade being diverted is greater with flex horizontal than vertical. You should be able to test this theory by stabbing a steel barrel at different angles and orientation.

[@matthewhumphreys8316]

I would love to see more tests of weapons and armor (and shields). One thing I think would be interesting would be to try thrusting against various targets (including various levels of armor) with more cutting-oriented blades, like Oakeshott Group 1 swords, and try cutting similar targets with more thrusting-oriented swords, like anti-armor arming swords and longswords and also sideswords and rapiers. You could also do a similar thing with various knives or daggers.

[@miklawson211]

So much innuendo! Great video.

[@tiltskillet7085]

One really impressive thing about that video to me is that you were doing fairly low effort strikes. Not even the lack of steps and body momentum, but I think you generally said your effort was around 60%. Second, an additional thought on blade alignment: maybe they found that larger but predictable flex in a horizontal orientation--where one knows which way the blade will bend--was better than smaller flex that could go to either side with a vertical orientation. Anyway, orientation would be another interesting thing to test if the handle allows you to do it comfortably.

[@LegacyUser]

If I had to take a guess. I think that the orientation of the blade may have something to do with an effect called normalization. This is where a penetrator will self align on a curving or angled plate reducing resistance. It doesn't mean anything with mild steel or wrought iron. However against thicker face hardened or homogeneous hard steel armors that are angled or curved, it would be a critical advantage. Also being able to adjust the carbon content of the blade at different points to change characteristics would also improve penetration. Finally great series of videos. I hope you guys find new and interesting things to stab. Have a great day.

[@themonarch8251]

Fascinating subject, including the peculiar handle/blade orientation. I have the Tod Cutler version of the A726 and to me it feels like the odd handle orientation has something to do with holding the dagger for defense and blocking, because it's such a massive chunk of steel. That's just a guess based on the feel of the thing, and its massive spine... Interesting additional discussion to the video with Tod. Honestly I could listen to this sort of thing all day, not that Matt needs any encouragement. :D

[@b.h.abbott-motley2427]

"Methods of Making Chain Mail (14th to 18th Centuries): A Metallographic Note" by Cyril Stanley Smith describes a circa-1550 German mail shirt that's 0.6% carbon & hardened by quenching & tempering to an average microhardness of 465 (Vickers). The article also describes a circa-1525 mail shirt of 0.5% carbon where the riveted links average 330 while the solid links average 195. By contrast, most of the other 14 mail examples analyzed in the article have mircrohardnesses in the 150-200 range & very low carbon content.

[@darktoranaga]

As was pointed out in the original Tod video, the orientation of the blade is likely to do with fitting through armor gaps. The blade is paralel with the gap, so it doesn't have to push the plates aside, it just goes between them. This is of course circumstantial, but it makes sense.

[@craigcolduck2077]

Someone else has probably already said this more succinctly, but the blade orientation may be such that it utilises the flex in the blade for a potentially useful effect as opposed to a potentially detrimental effect. If the blade flexes in a horizontal plane, it may bend with the greatest curvature or slope of the cuirass and be more likely to be deflected across the body as an arrow might be deflected. Because we're generally more of a vertical cylinder than a horizontal cylinder, a lateral flex in the blade is more likely to be deflected away from the body because of the smaller radius of curvature horizontally, or more acute angle of impact, and usually parallel to most articulations when face-to-face grappling (except at the shoulder/pauldron). This is assuming most rondel attacks are made in a predominantly vertical plane of movement, like using a hammer, or underarm stabbing. If the blade is side-on, and flexes in the vertical plane, it may be less likely to be deviated horizontally and more likely to slide up or down the front of the harness and find the gap in one of the more common, horizontal articulations at the abdomen, throat or groin and slip between the plates to find vital organs. I think it's possible that flexing vertically will increase the chances of the blade staying in contact with armour, sliding up or down the plates and finding a horizontal gap, whereas flexing horizontally will more likely deflect the blade off the plate and to the side of the body (except high up on the chest, where it might slide under the pauldron). I'd say it's easier to turn your body and deflect the blade horizontally to the side than arch backwards and deflect the blade clear of your body upwards or downwards. Of course, none of that matters if you find the articulation or gusset directly, so it may not matter in most situations, but statistically, it may have some noticeable effect in one common scenario, especially with less skilled attackers. It could help to keep the momentum of the attack targeted toward the centreline of the opponent and (slightly) less likely to be diverted laterally, allowing the opponent to move to your side and counterattack to a less protected area. I'm guessing. I've never fought in armour with a rondel, but I've trained combat sport athletes for the Olympics for over 30 years and ... biomechanics.

[@jamespowers1641]

The heat treatment of steel, if done properly, should change the structure of the steel so that mail and plate. The mail stretched and broke and the mild steel also stretched gave.

[@charlottesimonin2551]

Two things occurred to me: Flat on would match the typical orientation of the seams on the armor, and well hammered mild steel may resist penetration more than unworked mild steel particularly when it was case hardened for color. The design of the blade does not preclude it getting stuck if it does penetrate mild steel as you noticed in your tests. One of the problems with chain mail and gambesons is that they are not proof against an attacker with a bigger club.

[@memyself637]

Given the rise of Kevlar body armor being issued to the regular soldier, it's possible that the blade profile of a rondel dagger may again become relevant on the modern battlefield. A standard knife blade profile isn't extremely effective against an opponent wearing a Kevlar vest. But per your test a rondel dagger should be quite effective. While I think the rondel guards probably aren't a practical design for a soldier's kit, a rondel dagger type blade with a baselard type grip might work. Or you could stick with the double edge baselard blade, but make it a much more rigid, thicker, narrow diamond cross section. Perhaps a hollow grind cross section could allow some very limited cutting ability? The blade wouldn't have to be as long as the Medieval rondel or baselard dagger. A 7 - 8" blade should be plenty to go through a thick vest with enough left over for fatal penetration. I'd make the upper and lower handguards on the baselard style grip ovals instead of the traditional narrow, flatish crossguards. The oval profile would give more surface for the hand to rest on without protruding nearly as much as a full round rondel. This would make belt carry much easier and more practical. Add bayonet attachment hardware into the grip design and you'd have some very interesting possibilities. If the bayonet muzzle ring part was part of the lower hand guard and projecting perpendicular to the flat of the blade that'd give you even more area for the bottom of the hand to rest on, much like a rondel. And in defense it'd act like a nagel, offering some added hand protection, especially when using it in a point-up grip. And the superior penetration with such a bayonet mounted on a rifle against body armor would be far more effective than existing designs. If I had the funds I'd commission a custom knife maker to make one of these. BTW, I posted on your Patreon as SrsTwist. I'll rejoin it in coming months when finances allow.

[@caspar_van_walde]

That point on double mail was very interesting! First I thought, you meant it just like the HRE examples of Maille skirts presumably on top of Maille shirts. But what you said makes absolutely sense. And while thinking about it, I found, this might be the reason, why some depictions of Maille standarts/ Pisans in ca 1st half of the 15th century look somewhat bulky to me, what wondered me for quite some time now.

[@danielleriley2796]

I started here. Now I’m 3 videos in and I’m back here. Can’t wait.

[@onbedoeldekut1515]

Regarding flex, surely what you want is something that takes advantage of 'happy accidents'. People of the time would have seen many bouts on or off a field of combat, and have noticed the most fortuitous accidents, like when flex and angle of attack combine to make the tip skate over the armour. If the blade is 'standard', it would want to skate to the right or left of the armour, but if it's like the reprorodo, it'll most likely want to skate either toward the neck or pits if struck high, above the abdomen.

[@-RONNIE]

Thanks for the video and information ⚔️

[@ethomson0]

Just curious wondering whether there is a correlation between rondel dagger points and spear points in the same period?

[@TheS4ndm4n]

Some mechanical engineer's thoughts: By definition, hardness is the ability of a material to resist penetration and that's also how hardness is measured (i.e. Rockwell and others). Once the material is penetrated though, the hardness plays a smaller role. The process of stabbing is mechanically not as simple as one might think, but in my opinion it is fair to assume, that the property most resisting further tearing and therefore deeper penetration is the material's tensile strength. Toughness is not so much a factor, as long as the armor isn't breaking like glass, which it won't thanks to tempering and also that would be a completely different case of material failure (and therefore wildly different mechanisms are at work). That being said, I would be very interested in seeing how much surface hardening would help in comparison with through hardening. Now, I know on a thin plate it is not easy to only surface harden, let alone with medieval methods, but on thicker steel that may well make a difference. But then again, you won't stab through that. Hard to test, more food for thought I guess. My hypothesis is that a surface hardened material would fare well, if it is able to resist initial penetration, but allow for deeper penetration once pierced. In comparison, I would expect the through hardened steel to better resist initial penetration, as well as depth, since hardening usually increases both hardness and tensile strength. Another thing is, once the blade is through, the mechanical advantage, especially with such a long taper is immense. What you are mainly fighting at that point is friction, so oiling the blade may well increase depth of penetration, although possibly increasing the chance of glancing off.

[@gavinhammond1778]

Even though you went through the gambeson it seemed to give more resistance than one would suppose. It's no wonder that cloth armour was part of a complete system for so long. Good fun as ever.

[@TheFlyguywill]

I love Tod’s stuff. I only wish I lived in the UK so I didn’t have to pay the expensive shipping all the way to the US.

[@WhatIfBrigade]

If I'm ever transported back in time to before the invention of the rondel dagger I'm going to invent it. Looks like it would be extremely effective against anything less than a cuirass. It would go through Chain, Viking or Roman armor like butter.

[@michaelfoster-brown463]

You touched on it. But testing by using an armoured chest on the rondel to push it deeper would be worthwhile. Also a knee or thigh (rather like a carpet fitter). I.E. not just a push. Also not so rare too. Surely often the aim is to wrestle an armoured opponent to the ground and then apply the point. Further stabbing and then pushing (including using full body to thrust deeper) not mutually exclusive.

[@johndurack9678]

Great video mat

[@Mammothbronco]

Love the collaboration

[@MrTsiolkovsky]

Matt do you think that the tips on historical war rondels were sharpened or left with a working point? Did the Wallace Collection example have any evidence of this? I'm curious.

[@manatoa1]

I'd really like to see a few of Tod's different rondel daggers compared on the maille over cloth target. His different rondels look like they have quite different point geometry. Some , like your studded example very fine pointed, and another type had a reinforced point.

[@squatch2461]

🍻Great stuff. Would love to see you test and compare other shapes of knife/dagger.

[@jdlr369]

The flat edge slips in better between armor joints. When you hold it flat you also get a chance to view the dull edge for a block.

[@WJS774]

Regarding the edge alignment, my instincts say that the flex might help the blade dig in, if it was aligned differently it might be more likely to glance off instead.

[@user-im6fy4qp6m]

i think regarding your thoughts on the blade orientation of the museum dagger being opposite of your expectations i think it makes perfect sense given the context. think of how you might thrust the dagger into the front of a breast plate in an upward motion, and maintaining contact with the armor allow the blade to continue its movement sliding up and under a coif or helmet. similarly from behind or any angle really. the orientation just makes it easier for the blade to work itself behind or under whatever armor the opponent is wearing.

[@opesam]

Would it be possible to test a longsword in the same manner? Potentially half sworded to see if it works as well?

[@ac1dflare937]

After seeing the rondel stab through like butter, I would love to see this as there are some VERY pointy longswords and while wider blade and different geometry, the extra momentum should be spectacular one way or the other

[@thomasrisner]

Could you discuss the difference in uses of stilettos from regular daggers. Were they frowned upon? How common were they? How effective were they against armor? Etc

[@ethantoronto5815]

You're videos are really informative, and are fun to watch. There is a lot of internet content about how to learn to use longswords and other HEMA moves. Do you have a suggestion as to a good online source for learning HEMA? I'd try to find a studio, but there aren't any near me.

[@largemouthbass355]

Horizontal grip of the blade absorbs shock and maybe contributes to less damage to the point of the Rondel ? You may have greater penetration with it gripped vertically. But based on your testing penetration isn’t an issue from the get go. Great video as always!

[@moleman7632]

Regarding the orientation, the blade would also be held flat against your arm and wrist when defending, whereas if the blade edge was forward or backwards you could cut your own wrist open if the blade was used unarmoured

[@willaimhopkins2172]

A thought on the orientation of the blade: Its possible they had issues with overpenetration. I'd imagine that in a combat scenario after you stab someone their going to move, and if you get caught between bone, or got through a plate, or managed a joint and the person's arm or leg closed around it removing the blade could be a problem. Give how well the dagger went through your test metals fractionally better armor penetration wouldn't be worth an extra second or two to remove it. Just my thoughts, and this is assuming that allowing the blade to flex in that direction actually reduces penetration.

[@r_4_k-drone4321]

As for "why wasn't it popular earlier?" question - in my opinion, answer is: shields. Before era of full plate, shields were quite prominent, and shield does counter weapon like rondel dagger quite hard. With full plate shields got rather obsolete, making use of rondel dagger easier/viable.

[@wombatzus]

Another possibility regarding the blade orientation is that it is so that when it is laid against the arm for a block, the flat will be against the arm, preventing either catching the incoming blow on the edge (possibly damaging it) or if you were unlucky and pulled it out with the edge facing your own arm, causing the block to drive the edge into your own arm.

[@NikeaTiber]

Re: differentiation of steel and iron in period. You can spark test it. They had grinding wheels, throwing sparks can tell you a lot about a ferrous alloy's composition, or in the medieval sense, whether it is hardenable or not.

[@NikeaTiber]

Right before @26:00 you mention that the rondel you use as an example would only penetrate plate to the step. Given the overall size of the blade the fact that the step is about the same length as the grip suggests to me that the prevention of overpenetration is an intended feature of the step, as the length of narrower blade allows a sufficiently lethal depth of penetration while still allowing the full use of both hands for expedient blade removal.

[@Braindazzled]

This was interesting! Every authentic medieval Rondel I've ever seen has had a thick triangular spike for a blade and a handle that not only had no edge orientation, but was also conical, with the thinnest part of the grip closest to the blade and the "tail end" considerably wider. To my mind, this would tend to indicate both that the edge alignment wasn't important (esp. if it's a triangular spike) and that the wielder would probably need more of a mechanical advantage to withdraw the blade than to stab. (There are a few commercial knives with round guards, notably the famous Opinel, but that is a work knife, not indented to be drawn or opened hastily). Some on-line experts get apoplectic when I talk about this!

[@patrickdusablon2789]

Having watched the video you did with Tod, I would have loved to see how the rondel performed against the gambeson treated as a jupon over the plate, over the mail, over the arming doublet. As in, the best-case scenario for the victim and worst-case for the one delivering the blow.

[@Zraknul]

More testing would be interesting for sure. It was definitely surprising it was that good on mail and the mild steel.

[@onbedoeldekut1515]

To be honest, Matt, I wasn't surprised in the slightest. Despite the obvious differences, rondel daggers are essentially oversized thumbtacks. Spike geometry generally means that because of the incredibly steep angle of the point, as long as the material used is of a great enough rigidity in relation to its brittleness, when the material being attacked is more malleable, great penetration will be achieved without much effort. I would, however, have appreciated seeing what sort of penetration could have been achieved with the steel sat under a silken surcoat, over maille and gambesson and undergarments as well. Each layer might not offer so much protection individually, but I doubt the person on the receiving end would stay stock still and allow themselves to be skewered. Surely any 'wriggling' would cause each subsequent layer to either bind a tad more with the blade or widen each progressive puncture hole and deepen the penetration further still.

[@FanOMisery]

It's a relief to me that Matt managed to touch wood

[@leonidasperea6849]

I'm not a commenter, but this is your best hands on video informational I've seen to date.

[@bulldog4267]

I think you can do some cool stuff with the edge orientated “sideways” like the Wallace if you play around with the idea, especially against unarmored opponents, maybe good for getting past ribs or behind collar bones. I think it was Todd that once said back then their minds were no different to ours, everybody now has their own tastes & what we feel gives us a slight edge. Kinda like pikals, funny idea at first but can do some really cool stuff.

[@fiendishrabbit8259]

I think this video means we need to reevaluate how the rondel dagger could have been used in combat. If you've wrestled an opponent to the ground you might not need to find the gap in the helmets visor. It's quite possible that if you hold someones head down with your left hand you could probably slam a rondel dagger through the side or back of the helmet.

[@crumblethecookie6118]

I assume that the flexible blade can store and release energy like a bow. If it not too flexible and has enough grip, it either adds up enough energy to penetrate the plate or release the energy after that into the "flesh". So you got deeper than expected. If the target is not flat, the springy flex may help to slip off. The blade direction and length may be designed for a certain stab against a certain armor. Maybe the flat side shall have rest against something, so you can store enough energy in the springy blade. Or it simply failed and was kept as an odd thing. Like early airplanes with flapping wings.

[@btrenninger1]

Tod also makes bollock daggers with similar blades though a bit shorter, still quite punch like. I'd expect them to perform similarly. Main point would be interested in seeing the same tests with a variety of blade shapes to get a feel of comparison. I'd expect there to be some point angle beyond which mail penetration drops off radically.

[@colemcmullen3904]

I wonder if the purpose of the blade orientation is in part defensively intended? Maybe the blade being sideways may give slightly better coverage and reduce the chance that the opponent's blade would bite into the dagger's blade edge?

[@kito96]

Makes me wonder how well other dedicated armor peircing designs such as the Indian Katar and Pesh Kabz dagger would fare against armor.

[@jamesmayes4351]

Matt given that the French wore the jupon with armor often, and we saw in the video of arrows' vs armor that the jupon caught the arrows, do you think the jupon would catch the point enough to give you purchase on the armor, assuming plate.

[@garethbarry3825]

Just one thing to add- the ultimate tensile strength of pearlite ie unhardened steel is actually extremely high, in many instances higher than hardened steel. Hardened steel does give massively increased resistance to plastic deformation. Therefore, i am skeptical that hardened steel maille would perform any better in this test. Side note, i do think that many people get hung up on rockwell/brinell hardness- which is simpy a test of the depth of indentation that a hardened point can make at a certain load. Yes, it can perhaps tell us something about what to expect from a steel, but 50 HRC hardness doesn't instantly make something a piece of netheright uber steel.

[@FrogmortonHotchkiss]

Even before I was halfway through Tod's video, I was like, "Damn, I want to give this five thumbs up"... and this is a fantastic followup, Matt--answered a lot of my questions. I own a bow of middling power, and I can shoot field points through hardback books I could never stab through. So I am surprised that a rondel stab/push can go through armour that warbows would struggle with!? Or is that a mistaken thing to conclude here?

[@tapioperala3010]

Anything above 40 ... 50 mm depth is quite possibly a kill. In places like armpits and groin it is even less. So if you can get 50 mm deep, it's quite possibly a kill. In armpits, it is a kill. Maybe not immediately, but within reasonable time. I was surprised how well the rondal performed but it was a very pretty dagger :D Looking forward for more content on this topic!

[@rhor1882]

17:00 Another way medieval people may have known if it was steel or not could be through the sparks given off from the grind. Todd noticed this about the dagger you used for the testing, in his video about the making of the dagger.