If the sword belt is at all loose you'd want to get a hand on the scabbard while drawing the sword anyways. May as well loop a string over the top of the scabbard, when you grab the buckler handle you hold the scabbard down too. Having drawn the sword the bucker is now free and in the hand. Makes the most sense to me.
One carry method not mentioned is if you have enough money and rank, you just get a small child to carry said buckler and an older servant to carry your sword. Then have them follow you everywhere like baby ducks. In the illustrations of this I have seen the buckler is of a larger type with pointed boss and the sword looks sideswordish. Not sure exactly what time period that would be. Anyways that's my 2 cents worth. Happy Holidays everyone!
One method that I've found to be superior to anything but a belt hook is to tie a cord to ends of buckler handle, making it run parallel to said handle. Then, you draw your sword, use the cord to hang the buckler from mouth of the scabbard and put your sword back in. Since your buckler is not hanging from the sowrd, you can draw it well, and since handle of buckler is not obstructed by being used to hang it, you can get your left hand on buckler handle really well. Drawing from this position also puts you pretty much directly into prima position from I.33, and while the buckler hangs from it, it's pretty stable, non-swingy (if your cord is appropriately short) and exactly where most artwork puts it. Since all you're using is string, there will be no material evidence left behind after a few centuries. Moreover, if that string breaks - most likely by getting worn through - you'll have to hang the buckler from yuour sword hilt as a temporary measure, which I suspect is why people in most artwork do it, because drawing both sword and buckler from that position is impractical. The cords attached to just one end of handle can work, however, in my experience, they tend to go kind of narrow and make the buckler somewhat harder to draw when compared to the above method. We do have some leather strap remnants on a Royal Armories buckler that suggest it was done regardless. For belt hooks, I'd not discount them so quickly. Thing is, we have period artwork of dagger sheats being worn between other items on your belt, like here: manuscriptminiatures.com/4288/9544 Putting a belt hook in the vicinity of your scabbard could very well get you the same effect we see in artwork.
A string or cord that rests over the scabbard is one of the methods I described in the video. The paralel fitment is certainly good as it will stop the buckler flaping around as it does when people use a simple loop. I haven't discounted belt hooks. I did mention there is evidence of such hooks, just not yet evidence of them used in conjunction with the carry of bucklers. It is absolutely logical for a belt hook to be used, but until their is evidence of it, it remains a mere possibility, as opposed to the other methods which we have definitive evidence.
That combination of dagger sheath and pouch you see in the miniature has been reconstructed by Tod's Stuff. It can be found in one of his videos. I think the title was "how to wear your dagger".
Thank you Nick for your insights into this subject. I am always curious as to how people wore there kit in history. Love this stuff great content thanks again. Cheers!
Hanging it over the hilt will also dis balance the set. Hanging it with a string over the top of the scabbard hangs better. I think the nationaal militair museum in Soesterberg has one in the collection with a hook on the inside top, would have too look it up.
F'ing amazing illustrations of bucklers! I have some additional ones that you might want to see.😁 I'm thinking hard about ordering one of the smaller-size ones by Poker Armoury. I don't need it, but my arming sword needs it as a companion!😀
It would be cool if you had your background as a pc wallpaper. I had been wondering about buckler. For renfaire I just used a leather shoelace with a cantilever hooked around the grip so you couldn't see it and then over the rondel or my sword depending.
Yay, this question has been driving me nuts in regards to basket-hilt and buckler. With the back method, could the cord be linked to the scabbardf or belt rather than the sword to reduce entangling?
Not historical fictional new design idea* For a brief moment, I have imagined myself as a soldier from that era who has entered to the blacksmith or leather maker. I ordered a solution while bribing the guy that I will order for the whole army If I like the solution he comes up with, imagined I am a high-rank guy who doesn't like his buckler to swing around while carrying and making noises. And I still want to detach it easily when I need to defend myself. After sitting a while there the blacksmith came up with a solution that 2 ways belt system that belts the buckler to your side left leg with a band of leather and the place you attach it has a mouth for another leather piece that tightly holds buckler adheres to it like teeth holding each other and unless you want to detach it which is by pushing the buckler down and then grabbing the handle of it, it only detaches when you need it to. And also attaches back. It seems ahead of it's time belt structure though it is only some origamic trick pulled off. Which an experienced master leathersmith or a blacksmith might come up with. Also I need an original design idea for my work so I'll try my shot with this idea.
Shadiversity did a video on it: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-W1bszeudJCE.html. He's not nearly as much of a HEMA expert as Nick Thomas, but he's had some experience, and it's not like you can really spar safely with that weapon, anyway.
Over the shoulder meathod is feasible but I see a drawback well two one is if the thong is tied to the pommel and then to the buckler in an emergency like a street ambush you are fighting with your sword and buckler attached to each other that'd OK if you are only taking on one opponent at a time , but if one comes from your left as you are in a bined with another the thong mite not be long enough for you to use the buckler to block the second opponent. My thought is that the thong is not attached to the swords pommel but to the sheaths ties that suspend the scabberd to the belt , that way it does not get in the way of you grasping the hilt of your sword and with the thong being attached to the scabberd its is on your left side so will give you more freedom of movement . Also if you have no time to untie the pommel from the thong this means you will have to train with both the buckler and sword connected . This could lead to problems of the thong getting entangled with your belt buckel and other clothing like buttons or clothing buckels or pins or worse objects in the fight area like chars and tables or if in a street carts boxses and other objects that mite be used as cover
My bastard sword has a lip on the scabbard that can easily holed a buckler string ,it looks similar to what you see on the Swedish hunting knifes you can commonly buy .Now that I see bucklers I wonder if that is what is for my first thought was to create quick cuts ,by tying rope to it but hanging stuff seems to make sense .
My brother used a leather thong tied to each side of the handle it was then placeod over the scaberds mouth so the thong was on the inside of the sheeth the sword was then placed into the scaberd to draw you placed your left hand through the handle so your hand fingers pointed upwards through the handle the thumb the0n wrapped around the back of the scabberd to hold it firmly draw the sword right handed when the sword clears the scabberd grip the bucklers handlle with a full grip lifting upwards so the thong clears the scabberds mouth the thoung then drops to the lower side of the handle .idealy the thong is just lose enough to drop below the hand grip but also leaves enough room to slip it over the scabberds mouth sko it does not bounce or swing around alot when walking
I carry my giant 40cm buckler-shield on a long leather strap that I swing over my right shoulder and carry it on my left side hip/back. It´s not historical for bucklers, but it works and it´s fine for larp.
method one feels a bit like the cowboy with his holsters; when the atmosphere, or the location, starts to get a bit stabby, the swordsman's left hand hovers over the buckler and by the time his right is there to draw the sword he already has the buckler in hand. method two feels a bit clumsy. the civilian cant be twirling his buckler about in anticipation, it needs to remain out of the way until go-time and this method looks slow to draw method three is obviously the ideal, but I can't get my shit together to carry a mask and I usually end up pulling my tshirt over my nose- there is no way medieval me is going to keep his buckler-thong handy!
Better to ask, why wouldn't they be? The Scots famously used full basket hilt swords with their targe well into the 18th century. Bucklers and metal shields were commonly paired with all sorts of complex hilt swords in the form of rapiers and sideswords etc. The only reason people find it strange is because of the way the sword and buckler is paired so closely together to the sword hand in i.33, whereas most sword and buckler styles use the two much more independabtly. Complex hilts to not replace bucklers, they help protect the hand, but an offhand weapon like dagger or buckler allows attack and defence to be seperated and done at the same time rather than double time actions.
5:29 but in a quickly escalating fight would I not want my buckler first? I mean my opponent may well already have the drop and I will defence first before mounting a counter attack?
I'd far rather get my sword out first, a buckler alone is extremely hard to defend with as you present no real threat and have a tiny surface area with which to defend with. Largely you would just be at the mercy of your opponent, whereas a sword can cover all areas of the body and also present some threat to them. In this regard it is just like a rapier and dagger pairing, as the dagger is used essentially the same as the buckler. A good source then for this would be Capo Ferro where he instructs you to draw the sword first, and says "Then you will easily be able to grasp your cloak or extend your hand to your dagger safety, the point of your sword will keep your adversary at a distance while you prepare your second weapon,"
Even though some pictures showed them on sword hilts it could be that inexperienced or someone who carries but not fights too much might carry them this way. Just like the people carrying guns but not knowing how to use them to show that they are protecting themselves. This might be the uneducated midclass-like people who wants to intimidate the room. Or some peasant faking being a noble or soldier with stolen gears etc. The paintings make me think a bit deeper lol.
"Everybody was right-handed". How much is that true, though? In a recent video (ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Tv1aY1wMmyo.html), Roland Warzecha examined an original XII century arming sword that was clearly made to be used with the left hand. If I remember correctly, that's not the first leftie sword he showed on camera, but I don't remember whether he mentions somewhere how many of them in percentage he found during his museums visits. He didn't looked particularly surprised, anyway.
That was a light hearted joke which is in fact still mostly true. Left handedness was scorned. The military did not allow it and in vivilian life it was considering uncivilised. One fencing manual in the 18th century even explains how left handers should be bred out of scoiety. Clearly there were still left handers as they do get mentioned as an exception to the rule occasionally. Clearly left handedness was suppressed and so the number of people who used weapons left handed was clearly a very small fraction of the number of naturally left handed people.
@@AcademyofHistoricalFencing Yes, I get it, and I'm sure it's mostly true. But I think that maybe we've gone a bit overboard with this and come to the conclusion that lefties were "banned", when we actually have evidence that they weren't to the extent we usually think. Of course, a military environment has good practical reasons to not allow lefties in a formation. In a civilian self defence situation, though, being a leftie could even be advantageous, and I can easily imagine a leftie go "screw etiquette, I'm saving my life here". Dall'Agocchie, in the bit explaining what's the true edge, writes: "Ogni volta che haverete impugnato la spada cosi nella destra, come nella sinistra mano […]", which translates to "When you grip your sword either with your right hand, or with your left hand […]", so it clearly wasn't so uncommon or shunned. Also, Capoferro has a specific play for an attack against a leftie, and Marozzo an entire chapter. And these are just the first few examples I can think of off the top of my head. Anyway, my question was genuine. I'm curious about how much that was true.
I wouldn't say we have gone overboard. As I said my comments there were very much having a little fun with it. We know there were left handed swordsman, but we know they were supressed by cultural norms and military discipline. For these reasons there simply would be a lot less left handed swordsmen than today. A further peice of evidence is if you look to any asymmetric sword design and try to find left handed versions which were not intended for paired sword play, which Dall'Agocchie of course does include. The same goes for sword belts worn on the right for a left hander, you just never see them. Yes Capo Ferro mentions fighting them and a few others do too, like Lonnergan, but clearly with this much supression of left handedness there would be a hell of a lot less than today. A good modern equivelant would be Kendo. Typically all Kendo schools will enforce right handedness. There are a few exceptions which will allow left or the practice of both, but through this norm there are as a result a very small number of left handed Kendokas than there would be if they were allowed to use what came natrually to them.
Lichtenauer also mentions left-handers briefly by saying "if you are left, cut from the left". I think we should be wary of extrapolating 18th and 19th century attitudes back onto the medieval period. The Georgians and Victorians were obsessed with uniformity and regimentation in a way that medieval people don't seem to have cared nearly as much about.
