I have run into a dead end concerning my researching of the historical assembly of a rondel dagger. Perhaps someone can help.
The type of rondel Im looking at is a single edge dagger, with a triangular cross section, it general blade shape not unlike a modern carving knife. The type of knife in question has no ricasso, the blade terminates at the rondel(cross guard).
This junction area is where the confusion lies, concerning the fit of the rondel. Without a ricasso is the bevel of the blade ground and maintained completely through the tang so that the rondel will fit? Does anyone use this type of fit today? If not would there not be a "step" where the blade transitions from triangular to rectangular where the blade meets the tang? My thought is that the blade would be stronger without this "step".
This of course assumes that the rondel disk is fitted tang end and not blade end. I hope this all makes sence.
Here is an image of the type of dagger in question. No image? It can be seen at http://www.thomasdelmar.com/Catalogues/as260607/lot145.jpg
Thank you
R. Bandics
The type of rondel Im looking at is a single edge dagger, with a triangular cross section, it general blade shape not unlike a modern carving knife. The type of knife in question has no ricasso, the blade terminates at the rondel(cross guard).
This junction area is where the confusion lies, concerning the fit of the rondel. Without a ricasso is the bevel of the blade ground and maintained completely through the tang so that the rondel will fit? Does anyone use this type of fit today? If not would there not be a "step" where the blade transitions from triangular to rectangular where the blade meets the tang? My thought is that the blade would be stronger without this "step".
This of course assumes that the rondel disk is fitted tang end and not blade end. I hope this all makes sence.
Here is an image of the type of dagger in question. No image? It can be seen at http://www.thomasdelmar.com/Catalogues/as260607/lot145.jpg
Thank you
R. Bandics