Main > The Courtyard
Back Scabbards: was: inspiration and reference I:33
Sir William:
Maybe it was done with a partially open scabbard...you know, maybe the bottom half was enclosed but the rest was open, maybe with a strap at the top to keep the hilt in place. I don't know- there isn't any pictorial evidence to support it (no such relics seem to have come to light as of yet) so that could mean they never existed, or simply rotted into oblivion before they could be found. I could see if they wore it on their backs walking to battle- a scabbard banging against the leg can be bothersome after a while.
I think if you really want one, you should have one- but be careful, otherwise you might accidentally give the back of your head a shave it didn't need.
Corvus:
I often wore a blade on the back in my SCA garb - mainly because the larger blades are so much easier to carry, rather than historical accuracy. Indeed I suspect that carrying a blade on the back may have been seen in many time periods for that reason - or to keep the blade up and out of the wet during marches or such.
Lord Dane:
--- Quote from: Sir William on 2013-05-13, 15:54:39 ---Maybe it was done with a partially open scabbard...you know, maybe the bottom half was enclosed but the rest was open, maybe with a strap at the top to keep the hilt in place. I don't know- there isn't any pictorial evidence to support it (no such relics seem to have come to light as of yet) so that could mean they never existed, or simply rotted into oblivion before they could be found. I could see if they wore it on their backs walking to battle- a scabbard banging against the leg can be bothersome after a while.
I think if you really want one, you should have one- but be careful, otherwise you might accidentally give the back of your head a shave it didn't need.
--- End quote ---
To the last part Sir William, isn't that why you wore a helmet?? :) lol
Ian:
There's just no real practical reason in period to carry a sword on your back. I don't think it's an accident that there exists zero artistic depictions to date of a period sword being carried on someone's back.
Why would one want to? As an alternative to the hip, it makes no sense since it is impossible to draw a true sword from a scabbard secured to your back, don't believe me? try it! You could draw something like a big knife from your back, but again, this doesn't really lend itself to practicality, especially in harness. Even a knife, do I want to fumble around behind my head to find the grip when I could just put it on my hip and not have to worry about it when the time comes?
The only other reason you would carry a sword on your back is for simple transportation. But I again ask why? When I've got a whole wagon train of junk, why not just toss the big sword in it's scabbard on the wagon with all my other goods, or just strap it to my horse. Since I don't have immediate access to a sword on my back since you can't draw it, then why do I need it on my person at all when on the march? I don't. It is my belief that a sword not secured to the wearer's hip for immediate access would have been carried with all the other weapons on the supply wagons.
Lord Dane:
I actually have carried one on my back Ian. But I don't usually draw it quickly as it is for carrying. I have carried daggers n short swords in a rigged harness but u r right about practicality with larger swords.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version