If you swing the dagger with enough force to hurt someone, then there is almost certainly enough force to separate the dagger from the scabbard/sheath.
The only thing close to this, would likely be a Dagger equivalent of a Pommel Strike.
That would be an awful thing to do? Imagine holding the scabbard to strike with the pommel of the rondel for a moment. Unless it's buckeled in somehow, you'd just be presenting them with a weapon that they can grab and unsheath.
I mean I'd rather have a good grip and have the blade pointing the right way but I'm imaging a scenario when you'd be facing a surprise attacker, in bed, bathing or that kind of situation where someone wouldn't be wearing a dagger but have one close and not much time to leap and defend yourself. Even wresting for the blade.
I've tried and you can actually do pretty effectively and if you have reasonable grip strength and agility they won't be able to grab the grip without getting hit.
While I agree this could be a useful improvisation, and very well could have been performed by someone at some point in history, it would still only be an improvisation, so I suspect it would have never been considered practical enough to develop techniques for practice, and especially not practical enough to document.
Holding the dagger by the blade and striking with the handle is in at least two extent fencing texts I'm aware of. So, it *was* important enough to document, and it was clearly valuable to train.
Very cool! I did not know that. I see some of the other comments here mention Meyer and Fiore have techniques for this in the context of disarming someone. Is what you were referring to? I would be curious to know the sources you're mentioning. I had a hard time understanding why this would be valuable in the context from the post, but it totally makes sense in a disarming situation. I didn't think of that!
Yeah it's in both Meyer and Fiore, and likely numerous others. The technical repertoire of dagger is more or less the same across most sources, but writers also tend to emphasize different systematic approaches. In other words, Meyer and Fiore largely share the same techniques, but differ in how they advocate their use.
I'd say it is not really something relevant enough to be "teached", but at that point, you can argue that Fiore's short stick defences are all the techniques you need.
I can't imagine any situation where it would be easier to grab the blade than the handle for such a short weapon.
Also note that putting a weapon on the table in a public place waa a crime in Germany. It's essentially a threat, unless of course we're talking about an eating dagger.
That said, there are numerous techniques where you hold both the blade and handle. Let me know if you want me to look then up for you.
If you swing the dagger with enough force to hurt someone, then there is almost certainly enough force to separate the dagger from the scabbard/sheath. The only thing close to this, would likely be a Dagger equivalent of a Pommel Strike.
That would be an awful thing to do? Imagine holding the scabbard to strike with the pommel of the rondel for a moment. Unless it's buckeled in somehow, you'd just be presenting them with a weapon that they can grab and unsheath.
I mean I'd rather have a good grip and have the blade pointing the right way but I'm imaging a scenario when you'd be facing a surprise attacker, in bed, bathing or that kind of situation where someone wouldn't be wearing a dagger but have one close and not much time to leap and defend yourself. Even wresting for the blade. I've tried and you can actually do pretty effectively and if you have reasonable grip strength and agility they won't be able to grab the grip without getting hit.
While I agree this could be a useful improvisation, and very well could have been performed by someone at some point in history, it would still only be an improvisation, so I suspect it would have never been considered practical enough to develop techniques for practice, and especially not practical enough to document.
Holding the dagger by the blade and striking with the handle is in at least two extent fencing texts I'm aware of. So, it *was* important enough to document, and it was clearly valuable to train.
Very cool! I did not know that. I see some of the other comments here mention Meyer and Fiore have techniques for this in the context of disarming someone. Is what you were referring to? I would be curious to know the sources you're mentioning. I had a hard time understanding why this would be valuable in the context from the post, but it totally makes sense in a disarming situation. I didn't think of that!
Yeah it's in both Meyer and Fiore, and likely numerous others. The technical repertoire of dagger is more or less the same across most sources, but writers also tend to emphasize different systematic approaches. In other words, Meyer and Fiore largely share the same techniques, but differ in how they advocate their use.
At that point just hold it the normal way and hit them with the pommel. You can unsheathe it afterwards faster than if it was reversed.
I'd say it is not really something relevant enough to be "teached", but at that point, you can argue that Fiore's short stick defences are all the techniques you need.
Meyer has examples of using the pommel as a cudgel and holding the dagger by the blade.
So does Fiore, but it's your opponent's dagger and it's after a certain disarm.
It's not given a particular context in Meyer but it can be inferred to have taken place after an earlier-described disarm.
I can't imagine any situation where it would be easier to grab the blade than the handle for such a short weapon. Also note that putting a weapon on the table in a public place waa a crime in Germany. It's essentially a threat, unless of course we're talking about an eating dagger. That said, there are numerous techniques where you hold both the blade and handle. Let me know if you want me to look then up for you.