|
Post by Gunnar Wolfgard on Jan 31, 2019 20:24:10 GMT
Back on everyone's favorite subject, back mounted swords. It's more than just cool looking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 20:38:49 GMT
So if you use a thing no one was using historically, you can do a thing that wasn't done historically. Ok cool
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 20:44:52 GMT
I'm reminded of a group of Boy Scouts sending tenderfoot 1st timers out for a left handed smoke turner. Danged when someone did turn up with a piece of sheet metal and turn the smoke left.
|
|
|
Post by Gunnar Wolfgard on Jan 31, 2019 20:54:12 GMT
Also remember before 1960 when L'Anse aux Meadows was discovered everyone thought Columbus was the first European to discover America. Did that mean that the Vikings didn't discover America until 1960 or that we didn't know about it ? We're still discovering new things about history everyday. Not saying that back mounting was commonly done back then but it could have been done. There is some evidence of some carrying of swords on the back was done at times though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 20:58:12 GMT
Where might that evidence be found?
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Jan 31, 2019 21:01:54 GMT
I could certainly see *TRANSPORTING* a sword on the back. Though more likely they were transported by squires and underlings, as shown in the Tapestry and various Ms. illustrations. Knights were not backpackers. They had people and horses to carry their stuff.
And if it was too difficult to rig up in time, there's also ample evidence that swords would be slung baldric-style around the shoulder. The key is, if you need to be able to draw it in a fight? From the hip that's well documented. From the shoulder? It's a disaster. Your entire body is exposed until the blade is all the way out.
|
|
Ifrit
Member
More edgy than a double edge sword
Posts: 3,284
|
Post by Ifrit on Jan 31, 2019 21:02:41 GMT
Where might that evidence be found? There was some evidence the Celts did this. Some theorize it might have had do to with the wet marshes they needed to cross. I'll go find the statue pictures
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 21:05:05 GMT
Where might that evidence be found? There was some evidence the Celts did this. Some theorize it might have had do to with the wet marshes they needed to cross. I'll go find the statue pictures Oh yes, please do. As with any mentioning evidence. Produce it.
|
|
Ifrit
Member
More edgy than a double edge sword
Posts: 3,284
|
Post by Ifrit on Jan 31, 2019 21:06:51 GMT
There was some evidence the Celts did this. Some theorize it might have had do to with the wet marshes they needed to cross. I'll go find the statue pictures Oh yes, please do. As with any mentioning evidence. Produce it. Now I never said concrete proof. But there is SOME evidence. I still like back carry for transportation purposes. Skall does a better video where he wears it on his back pack. You can draw as you take off the bag, which would make any random sword fight hard to do anyway
|
|
|
Post by Gunnar Wolfgard on Jan 31, 2019 21:16:54 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2019 21:39:26 GMT
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. However, backpedaling is just that.
If I were trying to prove evidence of back carrying, I'd be promoting the Japanese happy pants type longswords. The video was about back scabbards and drawing from the back. Not Landschneckt.
@djinnobi Posting the Skal video, found within the first video is just pursuing the same "sure, why not" without offering any historical precedent or evidence of such.
FWIW, I have fooled around with baldrics and single hand swords. Just as one can put a strapped guitar around to their back, a baldric with a sword can be rotated around onto one's back. Not for drawing from such a position, just to get it out of the way.
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Jan 31, 2019 21:48:52 GMT
The Celtic back-scabbard evidence: Rather stylised art, so should be treated with some caution. This doesn't look like the classic movie back scabbard - the sword is on a belt around the waist, just at the back rather than at the side. However, it might well be the Celtic version of This is a Qin Dynasty chariot driver, and wearing the sword at his back keeps the sword away from his elbows and the reins. Given that the Celts used chariots, I wonder if the chalk figure above might be a chariot driver. Both the Chinese and the Celts used scabbard slides, so the Celtic version could be almost exactly the same. Note that the sword can be slid on the belt to bring to either hip; it doesn't need to be drawn from its current position.
|
|
Ifrit
Member
More edgy than a double edge sword
Posts: 3,284
|
Post by Ifrit on Jan 31, 2019 21:54:35 GMT
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. However, backpedaling is just that. If I were trying to prove evidence of back carrying, I'd be promoting the Japanese happy pants type longswords. The video was about back scabbards and drawing from the back. Not Landschneckt. @djinnobi Posting the Skal video, found within the first video is just pursuing the same "sure, why not" without offering any historical precedent or evidence of such. FWIW, I have fooled around with baldrics and single hand swords. Just as one can put a strapped guitar around to their back, a baldric with a sword can be rotated around onto one's back. Not for drawing from such a position, just to get it out of the way. Its something lol. Told ya it wasn't much evidence. Mostly just saying it could exist. Timo gave some good examples. I am a baldric guy, myself. Its too convenient. Was a great way to carry my machete when I was in the woods doing work.
|
|
|
Post by Gunnar Wolfgard on Jan 31, 2019 22:05:10 GMT
Well dang, who started this mess. Well all I can say is I have one and it's going to look cool at Ren Fairs where I'll headbutt anyone who says " that's not historically accurate ". Only kidding,,,, maybe.
|
|
Ifrit
Member
More edgy than a double edge sword
Posts: 3,284
|
Post by Ifrit on Jan 31, 2019 22:05:23 GMT
Does this count as historical evidence ?
|
|
|
Post by Gunnar Wolfgard on Jan 31, 2019 22:13:01 GMT
Does this count as historical evidence ? Works for me .
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Feb 1, 2019 2:49:08 GMT
Also remember before 1960 when L'Anse aux Meadows was discovered everyone thought Columbus was the first European to discover America. Did that mean that the Vikings didn't discover America until 1960 or that we didn't know about it ? We're still discovering new things about history everyday. Not saying that back mounting was commonly done back then but it could have been done. There is some evidence of some carrying of swords on the back was done at times though. The Vikings discovered it in so far as they landed, left, and never cared about it again. If it was ever actually done in any capacity why don't we ever see it in historical artwork, other than the scant Celtic example. Not sure how often medieval soldiers or even men carrying swords would do acrobatics, or jogging without purpose. The soldier carrying a zweihander on his shoulder doesn't count as backmounted either. The Chinese soldier should be examined a little bit more - evidence of a soldier who is more likely to use his rifle, then charge at an infantry unit with his sword first. The recent trend of trying to theorize ways to backwear a sword and saying "oh maybe they did this" is really just clickbait. Few years back it was "never done", and complaining about video games and TV. Why make two separate rigs for carrying your sword? We live in the age of excess and convenience, not them. Soldiers and civilians alike carried swords at the hip, all across the world for the majority of history (save the WW2 Chinese train guard, the possible Celtic example which we don't know the context of, and the Chinese chariot driver) so why are we trying to make up ways that they carried weapons? "It could have been done this way" does not equal "they did it sometimes". "They landed, left, and forgot about it" should not be regarded at all in the same way as the later discovery and colonization of the Americas. Screw the stupid Vikings
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Feb 1, 2019 11:59:55 GMT
I found a backcarry picture in the English Wikipedia articel about Odachi. Can't upload it in the moment. I don't know what evidence this is.
|
|
|
Post by Lancelot Chan on Feb 1, 2019 14:47:29 GMT
One thing you can see is that his sword isn't sharp. Otherwise his edge would have cut his sheath plenty times, dulling the edge. Not to mention he put his left hand to help guide the sword in, could rust the blade, or cut the fingers.
|
|
|
Post by Gunnar Wolfgard on Feb 1, 2019 15:36:39 GMT
Also remember before 1960 when L'Anse aux Meadows was discovered everyone thought Columbus was the first European to discover America. Did that mean that the Vikings didn't discover America until 1960 or that we didn't know about it ? We're still discovering new things about history everyday. Not saying that back mounting was commonly done back then but it could have been done. There is some evidence of some carrying of swords on the back was done at times though. The Vikings discovered it in so far as they landed, left, and never cared about it again. If it was ever actually done in any capacity why don't we ever see it in historical artwork, other than the scant Celtic example. Not sure how often medieval soldiers or even men carrying swords would do acrobatics, or jogging without purpose. The soldier carrying a zweihander on his shoulder doesn't count as backmounted either. The Chinese soldier should be examined a little bit more - evidence of a soldier who is more likely to use his rifle, then charge at an infantry unit with his sword first. The recent trend of trying to theorize ways to backwear a sword and saying "oh maybe they did this" is really just clickbait. Few years back it was "never done", and complaining about video games and TV. Why make two separate rigs for carrying your sword? We live in the age of excess and convenience, not them. Soldiers and civilians alike carried swords at the hip, all across the world for the majority of history (save the WW2 Chinese train guard, the possible Celtic example which we don't know the context of, and the Chinese chariot driver) so why are we trying to make up ways that they carried weapons? "It could have been done this way" does not equal "they did it sometimes". "They landed, left, and forgot about it" should not be regarded at all in the same way as the later discovery and colonization of the Americas. Screw the stupid Vikings WRONG again Jordan. You should spend more time studying history instead of just attacking everything people say. They estimated the Vikings stayed at L'Anse aux Meadows for at least three year maybe as long as ten and they continued to return to North America for 300 year for supplies and trade. The information is out there take the time to look it up instead of just attacking.
|
|