Main > The Courtyard
Back Scabbards: was: inspiration and reference I:33
Ian:
--- Quote from: Lord Dane on 2013-05-13, 21:42:01 ---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.
--- End quote ---
I understand that the modern person would find it convenient to carry on their back. We don't have a hundred wagons of crap in tow behind us carrying our stuff. That's precisely why I think it's a modern convenience and invention.
Sir James A:
--- Quote from: Ian on 2013-05-13, 22:24:25 ---
--- Quote from: Lord Dane on 2013-05-13, 21:42:01 ---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.
--- End quote ---
I understand that the modern person would find it convenient to carry on their back. We don't have a hundred wagons of crap in tow behind us carrying our stuff. That's precisely why I think it's a modern convenience and invention.
--- End quote ---
Yep, this. You probably had somebody to carry your weapons for you. And you probably weren't in armor all the time, either.
Lord Dane:
Only time I did carry it was in armor. Never have anyone to carry my stuff around so it gets put on me or stays in car (least at fair).
B. Patricius:
Actually, Sir Ian,
the gallowglass and Rievers tended to fight lightly from what I've been able to find. I don't think they had wagons to carry their equipment at all. More at most, like a light early US Cavalry unit, if it fit on your horse or person, you could take it with, beyond that, you adapted as it came... or in the case of Custer, he got wiped out.
Ian:
That doesn't mean the gallowglass liked to have swords bouncing of their backs. They would simply strap it to their horse like you yourself have implied. It's dangerous territory to find something modern and try to force it in to the medieval world with the justification of it was 'possible'. That just leads to bad science. In this case not only is there no direct evidence, there's also no indirect or circumstantial evidence, no artwork, no nothing. The notion of a back scabbard is a modern invention, plain and simple. All I'm saying is if you ask a question about historical accuracy we can only go by what we know to be true through the historical record. If it doesn't line up with a desired vision, you just have to accept it until new evidence arises or accept that what you're doing is just not historical. Either is ok.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version