In Shadow of Mordor, the main character draws his sword from the back, but has a special scabbard with a slit in the side that the sword goes through. For all the craziness in that game, that was a nice little detail.
Awesome! I didn't know that was a thing in those games! I had the same idea, though. Perfect solution. It would solve the problem of clipping through the sheathe in other games, too ;). I came up with the idea when trying to figure out how to get that to work with my Link cosplay. I never got to implement it, though, since I went with a pre-made sheathe rather than making my own, lol.
Use a Mace : 1. Effective against armor and shields. 2. Easy to forge. 3. Does not need to be sharpened. 4. Does not require complicated extraordinary techniques to use. 5. Easy to draw from back. 6. Looks intimidating and villainious. 7. Legal to carry. 8. -Who is the strongest Jedi Knight? -MACE Windu.
@@jhanks2012 you are lucky then. In my country you can only carry weapons that aren't longer than your index finger. And good to see a fellow mace warrior. Cheers :)
@@oguzhantavus4237 That sounds vastly unfair ... The larger the man the longer the weapon he may carry? I think the littler guys need the longer ones to stand a fair chance
@@jhanks2012 i totally agree with you. The government officials aren't smart enough to think like this. Good thing is the rules are for sharp weapons which doesn't include maces :)
@@oguzhantavus4237 i see :) well those same alt-left type government hacks are in my country too, they just haven't been able to successfully overthrow our Constitution yet which protects us! I guess if they ever do then I'll be an outlaw because I will sure never be unarmed! :D
I still find it likely that the idea of a sword on the back came from people observing sword wielders walking around with their swords outside of combat. If you have a larger sword, it seems rather comfortable and practical to sling your sword over your shoulder much like a rifle. In combat we often have a rifle across our front, but when not in combat, we often swing them across our shoulder on the back.
Very true. And as a professional combat arms soldier, I meet a lot of people who freak out and claim that a rifle on your back has no validity. Those people have never carried or run guns for a living. Similarly, there are dozens of ways to carry a rifle when expecting contact. People who say "You cannot do that" or "No one does this" usually don't have enough experience to know what living under arms actually entails. I could see the exact same thing being true of swords. You aren't ALWAYS in combat. But that chances are good that people, like today, always carried arms.
Its not like it cant be done. Some people like to try something different and eith practice and specialized gear it makes things more practical as well. For example while hunting most folks will walk in with a sling rifle on their shoulder. Few of them however can quickly bring that gun to bear if need be. However i do know some that can. And with practice i learned that there are a couple tiny adjustments and quirks that not only make it easier to do but nearly as fast if not faster than a forward slung position. I once watched a buddy not only do that swing around from the back but aim fire and kill in one shot a running deer going full out only a few dozen yrds away. It was one of the single slickest moves i have ever seen in real life with a firearm. It honestly couldve been cut right out of a green screen from any number of movies
derek leverknight from what you’re describing a visual reference for that would be in shutter island Leonardo DiCaprio does a similar thing with his rifle from the position of sling over shoulder he flips it around with one hand off his shoulder and into a combat stance really quickly which I thought was neat because I’ve never seen someone do that. Granted it’s probably not as epic as the John Wick level of deer hunting your friend did but it sounds similar to me
I think I know what you are talking about. You swing the butt of the rifle around from under neath, causing the barrel to sweep the ground, and the butt swings right up into your shoulder. Just make sure no one is standing behind you, haha. It is a neat trick I have tried before.
Back when the Norwegian army used G3s we had them on the back (with the pipe pointing down), and we learned to quickly swing them under the right arm into a firing position. Even worked with a backpack. You could also carry it with the pipe pointing up, but you'd have to swing the weapon around in such a way that the pipe pointed to everyone behind you to get it into a firing position, which is not safe. It's also slower. Now with our hk416s we carry them on the right side instead (or left if you're a lefty). Main difference is the G3 weighted twice as much and the sling was clipped to the weapon at two points instead of just one like normal.
"you can't draw the sword from the back" is actually no argument whatsoever against CARRYING the sword on the back. Especially the larger swords may even require to be carried on the back. In those cases people would simply remove the entire scabbard from the back and then draw the sword.
i have seen the next argument somewhere i can't remember where: the character The Hound from Game of Thrones has a normal arming sword on his hip for the "i'm under attack i need to get my sword out fast" time, but also has a longsword on his back which he takes out when thing get messy and needs to "take out the big guns"
@@88porpoise Well if it's something like a great sword then it would require two hands to use anyways, though you do have a point about the blade being exposed.
Djinn Iblis even with a larger sword all you’d do is quickly remove the strap and draw it from a different position. You don’t have to keep it in your carrying position to draw it. It’s exactly the same concept behind a gun sling, you can’t use it while carrying it on your back but it frees up your hands to do so and is loads easier not is it at all difficult to take it off and quickly ready it. In fact this would be exactly using a back holster for a rifle.
My argument would be: Travel with a sword on your back. A longsword you would use in a large fight. Then, use a dagger or shorter sword on the hip for ambushes etc.
A futuristic scabbard that opens when the owner of the sword grips the sword's hilt. 100% practical idea. Yes, I'm aware that I'm a genius, I watch Richard and Mortimer after all.
@@tawoorie to be fair the firearms in Mass Effect don't go into holsters they just fold or collapse into smaller configurations and magnetize to the armor.
What if the clay doll is just a dirty joke about the front sword and back sword. Kind of like that joke, "this is my rifle, this is my gun. This one is for fighting, this one for fun."
LMAO! this is my sword this is my sword, this is for fighting this is for fun...... this needs to be a thing in a fantasy game, a bunch of knights on a march singing that cadance lolz
@@darthXreven more like "this is my blade, this is my sword! This one's for fighting, this one's for fun!" Lmao, still a goo,d funny cadence because of soldier's humor.
the only time i can see wearing your Long/Greatsword on your back being practical is if you are traveling long distances and traversing difficult terrain (having your sword on your back makes it easier to climb with it out the way.) but you know that you are not likely to run into any real danger such as enemies.
That was my understanding of historical carries on the back. It was just easier to keep a very long sword from knocking against everything and dragging on the ground during travel. But, if you expected to be assailed or go into battle, you'd already have the sword drawn in preparation.
You woukd Not Carry a Great sword on jour back or on The waist since a Great sword is usually bigger then a normal sized adult like Great sword Are HUGE
The only scenario where wearing it on the back is for long distance traveling. And it would be a part of the whole backpack system. Cause bumping your leg for miles and miles on end would drive anyone crazy as hell.
Omfg! I wear a 20 inch hammer at work and it'll swing in between my legs when I pick up the pace, tripping me or smacking a leg well. Sure it may be in part to a bad mount but people tend to make equipment work for them, even if sub optimale
Why is everybody concerned with, wearing a sword on your back, and drawing a sword on your back? When I was in the Marine Corps, you have your rifle slung on your front, ready , but when needing to negotiate obstacles, or detain individuals, or in Garrison, you would sling it on your back. Why do we keep talking about this? If an attack happens, when the rifle/sword is on your back, you move it to your front, and present/draw the weapon...
Wearing on the back for carry purposes only probably happened if it was just used for battle (ex. a longsword that's too long to carry comfortably on your waist) and you don't have a horse or donkey to carry your stuff around. Get a piece of rope or a proper scabbard and you can walk around all day with the thing on your back no problem, you get jumped and you still have your travel stick/spear/one-handed backup to fend off the enemy if you don't have that 5 seconds it takes to get the scabbard off your shoulder and unsheathe the thing.
Carrying a longsword on the waist is still ok. But carrying a greatsword there would be too hard. And yeah if i'd go on a long journey i would carry a sword on my back...
If you ever looked at Japanese painting the ainu, the always had their big katana worn on their back. But material that we have show that they worn sword from a strap over the neck on the shoulder, hanging around the waist. But those sword look to be shorter.
Clarence Baluca Ninjas wear it on their waist behind their back. It's different than slinging it over your shoulder. Over your shoulder really only makes sense for travel purposes with a longer blade. Of course for shorter weapons, it's always been on your hip. Like arming swords or if you're taller, longswords.
@Cliven Longsight you're really underestimating the advantage of having a free hand that you can use for whatever you want, particularly good the walking stick part if you end up walking on a really poor road that rides on a mountain, if you ever went on long treks you know how convenient a single stick can be to keep the pace.
Reminds me of reverse-grip for swords. Can you pull it off? Yes. Does it come with some severe drawbacks? Yes. Did some people do it? Probably yes. Is it way more prevalent in media than it should be? Also yes.
No I disagree, reverse grip especially with a long sword is just ridiculous and infeasible. Where as having a sword on your back can be done and it makes little difference except that the blade is exposed to the elements (at least with Skall's design).
7:11 @Skallagrim I took a class in college that was half academic study and half immersion exercise about Roman legionaries, including training in marching, formation, and combat (a little). Of course, we had shields, and I can confirm that marching around carrying them is a significant pain in the ass. We wore our swords on the right, so that wasn't as much of a problem, but we were constantly getting smacked in the shins and ankles by both our own shields and our classmates'. We also had issues with the grip and inside of the shield boss chafing against the wrist, to the point that most of us added some sort of cushion or layered fabric as an improvised guard against that. Oh and by the way, our professor actually used your video on the gladius as learning material in the class! Thought you might want to know that your content has seen at least some educational use :)
attention everyone: YES, people in the middle ages did cary swords on their backs for purley transportation purposes, however they did not draw them from the back, they would take it off and attach the belt and scabbard around the waist if they intended to use it in the near future.
attention everyone: what are your SOURCES? without sources, you're just saying random stuff and expecting others to believe you. at least with a source, you have some kind of justification (that can be referenced) for the things that you say
salih Yılmaz I guess that would allow for a more non-telegraphic toss... and putting your sword away first would add more insult to injury- I mean death...
That gets rid of the purpose of the scabbard, protecting the blade from weathering. Too much hassle when you could just have it on your hip. It also is impractical to move with that, it would cut out of the scabbard (or in your case, sheath) on its own just by shifting.
@@pubcle I just addressed a suggestion pragmatically. How am I supposed to discern through text when people are serious or not? More to the point, how are you?
@@pubcle The whole "woosh" thing is rarely used in a way where the person isn't making an assumption. If there's nothing in the statement to imply it, it's not really over the person's head. I've seen plenty of comments like that in seriousness.
It's not being hostile and I'm certain it's a joke because firstly, he has Anonymous as his pfp, which generally indicates troll. Secondly, the sword wouldn't just slice through at movement, it would slice through when putting it in the scabbard in the first place. Third, this is just clearly mocking people who go over the top to try and defend things. "Woosh" is the equivalent of a light hearted nudge on the shoulder to remind people of sense, it's not a hostile thing, I don't know why you seem to be taking it so seriously. Obversechaos I don't know where you're getting that. For instance, when I watched some videos about MHA and he kept making jokes how the invisible character was in every scene in the opening but deadpanned the delivery, it's still a woosh when people go "is she really in all those scenes?"
I try to think about things like this in a modern setting. People often carry there hand guns in different positions for different reasons. For example a cross draw is usually not the best way to draw a firearm but if you are in a job that you are sitting a lot of the time like a taxi driver it might be more useful. People also sometimes carry in different ways because they find it more comfortable. It wouldn't be hard to imagine the same thing applied to people in history. I also have no doubt there may have been people back then that were "tacticool" just like today so would carry in a way to look good rather then it being practical.
I can see that I used to use an in the beltline concealed holster that made it to where only a little bit of the grip showed. Now I usually stick my gun in my jeans back right pocket because it's more comfortable. The only time I really sit is when I'm in my truck so I just take it out the pocket and put it in the glove box. Draw back I can see is someone behind me could easily see it and if stupid enough try to take it. Problem there is while I keep a full mag in it I have the safety on and no round chambered and the Ruger sr9c for those that aren't familiar with it is not an easy weapon to figure out. Not impossible though. Is definitely have enough time to break their nose for trying.
Most shields were relatively disposable. So putting extra effort in it (which doesn't increase durability at the same time) is probably not worth your time
@@antonuramer most scabbards were relativly disposable aswell. sounds like an interessting idea but slighlty impractable sheilds are already heavy enough without a sword there aswell
Well to draw such short sword you would probably need to lower your shield to draw it so it makes you vulnerable for a second, also it ads weight to your shield as you are carrying it which would be more tiring and in a long run give you some spinal problems. It would look cool though :D
I know its fiction, but I like the idea that they point out in A song of ice and fice. When John receives long claw, Mormont tells him "that sword is too long, you'll have to wear it on your back or it will get in the way". Later on any time, he feels he might have need of it, "John loosened long claw of its scabbard" pointing that he cant just pull the sword off his back easily, he has to loosen it first. This probably means undoing a fasting on the top to leave a short portion of the sword in the scabbard. In the show, It seems in some scenes that he actually has to take the scabbard all the way off his back to pull the sword out. This kinda makes sense, and the loosening would be of the scabbard itself so he can sling it off his back relatively quickly. But agreeing with a lot of other comments it seems the carry on the back was more for travel and practicality of the sword not getting in the way, and the person wearing it would take the scabbard off their backs and pull, or switch to wearing it on their side when they felt the need to be battle ready.
that, combined with the Witcher Screenshot just gave me an Idea: when the scabbard is mounted on the Belt at just one Point, it leaves it free to swing. so, if the scabbard would be high enough to prevent accidental cutting and had a secondary strap near the lower tip, you could, for emergency, unfasten your secondary strap and pull the sword out from the now free-swinging scabbard. (kinda like rolling the Blade over your shoulder, as it is often depicted.) of course, you now have a free-swinging scabbard,, which, i imagine, would be irritating. would bee ann iinteresting concept to test, i think.
If what you say is true, the sword from the books is totally different from the series. In the series it's definitely short enough to carry in the hip.
@@leandrog2785 It should be mentioned that the show changed characters ages, Jon snow was younger, and thus smaller, then he was portrayed in the show.
The Metatron covered this topic once with the nodachi. The blade was so large that it had to be carried on the back. Is difficult to draw the blade but it was a battlefield weapon so it was no big deal. Is posible for one person to draw it alone but if there is help available that would be preferable. Obviously os not drawn from the back it was taken off and draw from the side. He said that the name also gave some clues on how it was used.
I always thought the same about this topic, drawing it from the back is nuts, but a full built scabbard with a strap is really useful. You take it off, and take the balde out. Just like modern rifles and shotguns, they are in the back, you pull them off and you use them. If someone charges at you, you have your dagger on medieval combat, or your knife and gun in modern.
Didn't metatron also show a way that you can draw a katana from the back? Have the scabbard only attached near the shoulder and when drawing pull the scabbard down while drawing the sword.
Two questions: 1) What about wearing the sword on the back while riding horseback? Not into battle, just getting to a destination. 2) What about a scabbard that has an opening on the side near the top that would allow the tip to be pulled out sideways as the blade is being drawn?
Wearing a scabbard on your back while traveling is no problem at all. It doesn't matter really if you ride on a horse or go by foot. But if you ride a horse, you can attach the scabbard on the saddle as well. About the second point, that's also what I think of as an 'ideal' combination of backmounted blades and blade protection.
1. While not fond of the idea of back scabbard, I am not entirely against the possibility that swords can be worn on the back for logistic reasons. But then again anything can be worn on the back for logistic reasons. 2. I believe in combat is it more practical to wear it at the waist. Smooth and quick unsheathing of a sword from the back as been proven possible many times over but sheathing it has always been problematic. It is not about possibility here, yes it is possible. But with enough engineering I can wear the sword on my scrotum too.
Did you ever do horse riding with a sword? And did you do combat manouvering on a horse with sword? From time to time it hapoens that you fell off the horse. And you are happy not to increase the chance to break your spine because your back has a scabbard attacjed to it once it hit the ground. The risk of having major injuries to your hip becaus you have a scabbard at the side is big enough. There is really no single reason to have ot on your back. Most important point: the scabbard is needed so much to protect the extreme expensive and important blade. With a full scabbard it is not possible to draw the sword from the back. And even a little slit to the side of the scabbard to make drawing easier or even possible will increase the damage to the blade just because it is exposed to air, dust, humidity. Once you spend the amount of the money equal to what you would spend for a small car for a 100percent replica of a medieval sword, you will very fast learn to value the scabbard.
If you're already traveling via horse, it's easier to hang sword and scabbard on the saddle. It's as Skall said, there's almost no historic findings of back scabbards and it's because they make not much sense. When you travel on foot, you already have a lot of shit on your back and every added weight makes it worse. So it's better to distribute the weight a bit and since a sword makes more sense on the waist anyway, just leave it there. Added to that, when you were rich enough to own a sword (talking only medieval Europe here tbh), there was a high chance that you also had servants. So just let them carry it with the rest of your stuff.
How about a scabbard that are only attached at the top below your shoulder so when you draw it the scabbard “pivot” on your back (the top stays close to where it is, the end/point lifts from your back so the scabbard is somewhat vertical when you draw), so you more pull the sword forward vs upwards? That way it would bounce some more on your back, but you would get some more “pulling length”.
I'd think the issue with that would be now you don't really have a secure scabbard. It'd jostle and slap at your back as you walk/ride a horse or whatever else. Wouldn't be terribly comfortable for long journeys.
F3N01 Could loosen/secure with a small string at your left hip. However the problem is blade length, you can only pull so far from the shoulder of the same shoulder.
As far as I know, Landsknechts transported their battle swords (zweihanders/flamberge) on their backs due to how long they were and due to the fact, that they had a normal sword on the side as well. And I do mean transported, not used a back scabbard. I believe there was some period imagery, though most I could find was them just throwing it over the shoulder and holding it by the pommel. And about the Witcher - in the first game it's clearly shown that Geralt yanks the sword and throws it into the air and then catches it (it's also how he pulls it out in the books, sadly - he does that only with a steel sword, and not with both) and in the second game you can see that the scabbard is cut open on left side in the top, and he pulls it most of the way then twists it around to pull the rest through that opening on the side.
rubbers3 , Landsknechte were soldiers and they had logisitics. Like a modern soldier won t carry a machine gun for longer distances but put it on a truck. Landsknechte would use a cart. However for mid and short marches they would carry the Zweihänder like polearms on the back. Carrying it on the back would also make sense. However, the length could cause troubles as the tip would either touches your legs making marching uncomfortable or it may touch your neighbor in the marching formation causing trouble to them.
I imagine this sort of sheath would also help in wet conditions. You often hear from historical accounts that after a lot of humidity or lots of rain, it would either be impossible or very hard to draw, as the wood in the sheath would expand, and the metal would rust, causing a bond. With less sheath covering the sword, you could probably draw it much easier. In this case too, you could possibly keep your sword more covered by a cloak/coat on your back, or even under a pack you hold on your shoulders, preventing it from rusting as much as it normally would. Just supposition, but I wanted to mention it.
Great video! Interesting facts about Celtic warriors, graves and figurines. Emperor Qin was buried with 8000 terra cotta warriors comprising his afterlife army. Some of the figures depict warriors with a scabbard across the back. Additionally, historical Chinese art depicts figures wearing of the scabbard across the back. IMO there are two types of depictions shown. One type appears to be a "low scabbard" which could allow for sword draw. The other type appears to be "slung" so that the sword and scabbard would be first brought over the arm and then drawn. Why wear a sword on the back? The Qin warriors appear to be specialists with very long sword types and may have worn their weapons on the march according to the regulations of their army. Other artwork implies several conditions with the sword on the back: - wandering Daoist monk or immortal; keeps the sword out of the water when fording at shallow crossings. Crossings through moving water often employ both hands and a staff for stability. Trailing the sword in the moving water seems to have a lot of downsides. - immortal riding in boat; perhaps it was polite to wear the sword high and across the back, so as not to poke holes in the leather hull and sink the other immortals riding in the boat. - warrior crossing across from one ship on rope bridge to another ship while at sea; appears to be a transfer operation rather than a hostile boarding. Historical photos of Japanese riflemen with swords show them wearing the scabbard across the back, usually associated with a maritime setting. Across-the-back carry appears to be primarily oriented towards logistics and environment rather than immediate readiness to deploy/employ the weapon.
Skall, France did not "not try" to create an analog to english archers - it tried, it was called frank archers. The problem was it did not work - englishmen basically had a lot of hunters in certain areas, who lived and died with their bow, so they naturally made good archers, and France, being more agrarian, actually discouraged hunting for their people, so when the need came, they simply could not make enough. It's just like with mongolians - they were born on the horse and they hunted for living, so they had endless mobilisation reserve of skilled horsed bowmen. Pragmatism is like... well... Let's talk today. The strongest army in the world today is american, the second is russian, the third is chinese. If we apply your logic, we will just say "it's obvious that to be a strong army, you nedd to have a dozen carriers, so why, oh why does not Russia building any? On the opposite - they (well, we) focus on mechanized infantry, tanks ands all sorts of armored warfare", but in reality the answer to this question is clear if you only look at the map - USA is basically an island empire and did not fought on it's own soil for a hundred years, where Russian potential battles all lie on the land - whether it is Europe, China, or the middle-east, and russia almost always fought the major wars on it's own territory. And even if Putin decided that we need two dozen carriers - how would they help, really? So yeah, pragmatism always there, it's just not in the parts of the picture, but in a whole of it
aircraft carriers and a big navy in general is necessary if you want to project your force all over the world, you won't invade anyone unless you have the means to deliver large numbers of troops quickly. Besides, the ability to bring the fight to your enemy's territory means you won't suffer many civilian and infrastructure loss. Russia doesn't build a big navy because it would be seen as a signal of them getting on the offensive, while a large land army is seen as defensive.
That and the fact that russia has a limited number of warm water ports and they're in areas that are easily blockaded. From what I understand their northern coast isn't very useful for ships due to the ice. Granted this applies to trading far more than it does to a navy, but still.
Well, it's not totally accurate - i mean, even with the current navy Russia projects well enough where it needs to project. And if we remember soviet union - it projected it's power across half the planet, while still being massively over... fleeted by USA? Wrong word, but you get the point. It's a question of where you want to fight and with what exactly.
Well, yeah, it's sort of the reason why Crimea happened, from the military point of view. But again - it's exactly what I said - military in every country is built in the way to serve the country's needs, and not because of some universal standarts of "right" or "reasonable"
@@arx3516 and the fact that russia pretty much can drive/walk to anywhere they would want to invade (asia, europe, africa), unlike the us, who needs the navy to project power to these regions.
Ok, so the only realistic version of wearing a sword on the back ive heard, is in a book I was reading, cant remember off the top of my head, but the character in that book had a bastard ish sized sword, and the thing with the scabbard was it was open on one side half way up as a method of drawing the blade quicker, this was used quite a few times to surprise his opponents, to me this sort of made it viable.
Looking at the covers it may well have been that, I recall it not having monsters so im not too sure, im actually looking through all my books now to see if I still have it xD
I had an idea for a sword scabbard that funnels and coils on the way up, so that you can twist it while drawing, perhaps having a slit along the back for the blade to come out
While probably not historical, there are modern swords with a scabbard meant for back wear that is split starting from about half way up just for this purpose.
In my Eyes, it's a pretty good alternative for scouts or military rangers, people moving through forest, kneeling and climbing but also carrying a swort with them. If the swort being out of the way is more important than being a milisecond faster. For example shorter "tool-weapons" like machetes are often carried at the lower back to have free space for moving your legs
IIRC, the Witcher author mentioned that many of the Witcher smiths at Kaer Mohren would use a two-fold process to make a back mounted sheath functional. The first part was a spring loaded sheath, specifically in the tip of the sheath. The Witcher would grab the pommel, press downward and then start to pull the blade out, as this would release the pin style lock on the spring, allowing tension from the spring itself to release. The second part was a snap-held upper third of the sheath. The left side of the upper part of the sheath was held on with a double, small, snap based divot (for right handed draws and vice versa for left handed draws) and would often be pulled away as the sword was drawn and retrieved later. Geralt complained of this constant retrieval in one of the books and I can’t remember if it was ever improved upon or not. Always thought that was an interesting attempt in a fantasy world to non-magically explain a functional full coverage back mounted sheath.
It could also be like the trope of people wearing armor all the time while travelling. You won't wear your plate armor all the time, either. Both go on the backpack, and the dagger stays on the.belt. if you are getting attacked, use the dagger, and after dropping the backpack , you can draw the sword from there, easily. You would drop your burden, anyway, if you need to fight.
I'm halfway through the video but I have to mention something. I once saw something in Skyrim that made me think that sword on back was viable and actually pretty good. So, it's the way your character carries the Ancient Draugr sword on the hip. It's not a scabbard, just a ring connected to the belt. The ring is wide enough for the sword to go through, but it stops at the guard and hangs like that. So, if you were to wear a strap that had a big ring at your back, you could potentially carry it like that. If the ring was a bit lower, say bellow your shoulderblades, you would be able to "sheath" and "unsheath" it with ease. The only problem I see with this is that the blade would dangle quite a bit. Maybe instead of a ring, it was just a square. that way it would keep the blade fixed. I'd really love for someone to test this.
Ugh this is why I don't like swords anyway, they're like battlefield violins. Just carry a good spear or axe and you don't have to worry about "the elements". Unless you're fighting a mage.
@@Swift_LN Honestly not really, unless you think the wooden haft is more effective than the metal blade. Less susceptible? Sure; with less length there's less risk of substantial damage when it's corroded, but still it gets damaged and dulled by the elements. A mace or hammer, on the other hand...
You could quite easily make a full length scabbard where the leather is slit from halfway down, the leather could be made so it holds together nicely and protect the blade but would still allow it to be drawn from the back. Uses, leaving both hands free (hip carried sword would swing more freely and may require correcting) for pulling carts, riding horses, climbing ladders while still leaving the weapon accessible in case of emergency. When you then rehang the scabbard on your belt you would pull up a leather ring that you attach to the belt, or use a bit of rope, this way the scabbard is held firmly closed and prevents the sword from slipping out of the scabbard and cutting its owner, essentially turning into a regular scabbard. Biggest downside, drawing from the back repeatedly is likely going to harm the scabbard, but that is for emergencies so it would be an acceptable compromise. Also, the slit would allow water to enter the scabbard more easily in heavy rain, in both positions. But in heavy rain you could very well require your hands for balance to prevent falling when going from muddy streets to ladders. Soldiers in wars tend to wind up wading in the mud sooner or later (except in deserts, maybe) In my mind back carried swords would make more sense for longer travel, with or without a backpack, to prevent the sword from requiring a hand for balance as well as to simply keep it's centre mass closer to your own centre mass. Making a scabbard that works wouldn't be difficult, the option is to either carry it on your hip and deal with the minor nuisances or wrap it and stow it in your backpack. Don't underestimate minor nuisances, people often do more work just to avoid a minor nuisance.
I've been experimenting around with my husband's sword today, wich has a 90cm blade (not a Zweihänder, more like Bastard idk?) and I'm 175cm tall. While drawing OVER the shoulder does not work I found a way that's somewhat okay: I put the belt diagonally over my right shoulder like a strap bag. When I tuck at the front the sword sits on my upper back and can be carried okay-ish (the belt isn't balanced for this obviously). But to draw it I do this: move the belt back around until the handle and guard sit at the lower back to the left. Then the sword can be rotated slightly to a horizontal positon at the lower back (with the left hand on the scabbard) handle to the right, blade sticking out to the left. My right hand can then grip the handle from the right back, UNDER the shoulder, and draw it without too much trouble. I end up in the super secret reverse grip stance automatically ;) I can even put it back, because the left hand can comfortably hold the scabbard opening (well except one does not see anything).
From my HEMA experience (by which I mean carrying swords around on public transit and stuff), I think that wearing the sword on the back actually makes plenty of sense for one sort of character, interestingly enough it's one that always is depicted as doing it: Link-style adventurers who climb about and use gadgets a lot. In general even a bigass feder worn on the back is very convenient for doing all sorts of motions. The caveat is that I think that you wouldn't really be able to get away with a half scabbard or any other weird arrangement to draw it quickly. A character like that needs a proper one that effectively protects the sword. So what I think makes the most sense for back-scabbard arrangements is one that's purely for transportation without even considering the possibility of quickly drawing it. The character would wear the sword on the back to be able to perform certain actions unhindered, but when there's a possibility of combat the setup should be quickly adapted to be worn on the waist. If the character doesn't fight with some offhand weapon (or a two-handed sword), you could even just have the scabbard on a belt on the back, and if things might get dangerous, carry the scabbard in-hand for an especially quick draw, then ditch it and hope that you can retrieve it later.
Shadiversity did a couple of videos more recently about a back-scabbard that allows a quick one-handed draw and a one-handed re-sheathe while being reasonably protective and pretty secure - basic design is to have a side-slit for the top half (or so) of the scabbard, and a base-plate beside it to help guide the blade back in.
We should also acknowledge the possibility that the sword on the back was a burial style, and that the figurines are meant to represent the burial practice, or possibly the spirits of the dead. Also, there's the woodblock art of a samurai carrying an odachi on the Wikipedia page (as the article you brought up mentioned) - this was probably done to transport the large blade when not in use, I don't get the impression that one would attempt to draw it form that state. I could be wrong ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I had one shoulder belt in LARP at some point that was basically using 2 star-shaped cylinders with rounded points that were mounted on rigid iron pins. When I pushed the handle between the 2 cylinders (vertically would look basically like this: * 0 * ) the distance between the 2 was a bit under the actual size of the handle so it would force the 2 iron pins apart and the tension it would generate kept the blade in place. The only caveat was that it was homemade and I had nothing to keep the belt from rolling or moving so it was kinda uncomfortable and the blade kept going down because of it. It was awfully quick to draw and put back though, much faster than a traditionally enclosed scabbard.
If you put that online and linked, I think people would take interest and perhaps even fix the problems you were having. Hell, I don't even LARP and I'd be interested in seeing some pictures linkes out of sheer curiosity.
I think hip-mounted scabbards are by far the most practical, for reasons mentioned in the video. However, there are ways I can think of to bypass the disadvantages of a back-mounted scabbard. One could still have a scabbard that goes the entire length of the blade if there were an opening in the outward side of it that allowed the sword to be drawn like it had a shorter scabbard and still boast the protection of a full scabbard. I dislike the idea of magnets being used to mount a sword because it will not offer the protection of a scabbard and will also have one of two problems: 1, it will require a small effort to break the magnetic bond between the sword and the magnets, or 2, it won't carry the sword with enough strength. There is also the significantly smaller risk of the sword itself gaining slight magnetic charge, generating another factor in combat. I deeply enjoy your videos, Skal, and I look forward to each one you make.
Hey Skal! I know I'm a little late to the party here but I actually got an idea for a "on the back carry" scabbard from Valkyrie Profile 2 and it would work for a longsword or other similarly long weapons: A short scabbard like the one you're using, but mounted lower on the back, and a snap loop that would go around the cross guard. Unsnap and pull up 6 inches and you can use your longsword or claymore. One of the characters in Valkyrie Profile 2 had a greatsword that he kept in a scabbard similar to what I've described. Anyway, great video, love your work.
I wonder how they'll work around this in the Witcher Netflix show, because doing this old trick of cutting away at the draw would be noticable quickly considering how often it'll happen in the show. I personally wouldn't mind if they would just ditch that entirely, but I guess some of the fanbase would want to murder the writers for that. Generally the way Geralt and Ciri draw their swords in the books makes no sense. They pull on the shoulder strap which holds the scabbard and then draw, as if this fixes the problem of your arms being to short. Though you could argue that it's never explicitly stated that their scabbards are fully closed.
True. I like to think that maybe they aren't always immediately drawable, which would be more realistic than the games. In one of the trailers for the Witcher III (I think it was called killing monsters), we see Geralt riding Roach with his swords strapped to Roach's side. It's not terribly practical for getting to them in a hurry, but it seems rather efficient as a way to carry them. Besides, it's not like witchers are helpless without their swords (though the video games kinda disagree there). In the trailer i mentioned, geralt kills 3 (I think) soldiers, who have weapons, with only a dagger. Side note: witcher swords seem to have sheaths a lot of the time, which might make things easier since sheaths are flexible.
In the first books Geralt does not carry the Silver sword on his back. It is packed with other supplies on Roach and only taken out and made ready when on a monster killing job.
Ancient Celtic swords might perhaps have been bronze? If so, the need to keep the blade metal out of the elements is reduced, making a half-scabbard somewhat more practical. As a separate matter, who made that particular Viking-style sword? It's quite nice looking. Last point about back scabbards; there were historical cases of swords being carried on the back for marching and transport, including big two-handed swords of several kinds in several cultures. But that's not the same as wearing them on the back into battle, where one expects to need to draw them. So I wonder if these Celtic depictions might not be a case of wearing the sword for travel and transport, and if the sword might not have been transferred to a more conventional waist belt when battle was expected. And on a very different point, the French *did* adapt to English longbows, with heavier armor, more use of crossbows, and more dismounted attacks, and the adaptations were successful in some battles; look, for instance, at the battle of Castillion. And for that matter, the battle of Poitiers was won by the English without recourse to their longbows.
I doubt big swords were needed to be drawed at a moment notice. For example a Japanese Swordmen may of had his Tachi, wakizashi, and his Tantō on his waist which were more general practical weapons then his ōdachi.
Just so. I'm just wondering if the Celtic figurines in question were showing that sort of "transport" of swords on the back, or if they really were wearing their swords on their backs as a routine matter, with the intent to draw them quickly if needed. It is, after all, possible to draw a short blade from the back, even with a full-length scabbard. On the other hand, even with Skallagrim's technique, it's still troublesome to re-sheath a sword into a scabbard worn on the back. My own suspicion is that the no one used half-scabbards with iron swords, and that, if some ancient Celts did wear swords on their backs, the blades were either bronze, or else, if iron, then short enough to allow for a full length scabbard.
+mk14m0 I assume the figurines with the swords on their back aren't accurate depictions of warriors. Though I imagine it'd be bronze if the swords were real.
I know that I'm commenting on a kinda old video, but I'm a pretty new subscriber so lets do this :) I am really far from an expert I just fell in love with arms and armor actually two years ago. And it is not about my knowledge, much more about my logic, that you mentioned, there are examples that some people used to carry the sword on the back. And for me it is about when you talked about drawing the sword. Because in my opinion the scabbard is about carrying and preserve the sword. Nothing else. Okay it can be used for fighting but that is not the main reason. To put it back on your waist is much more easier. Maybe that can be a reason. For me I'm about lets carry it on my back, draw it when the time comes, then when it is over, move the scabbard to my front or to an angle where I can put it back. Thank you for your content!
I've always interpreted the "sword on the back" thing as a means of transporting your hella big longsword while traveling on foot. If you're attacked on the road by brigands or trolls, you pull your one-handed sword from your waist. Once you get to your destination, you have your big-ass sword for big-battle and head-lopping. Also, if you really need that weapon from your back, you have your nerdy little squire draw it while you crouch on one knee. Also a good time to finally let out that fart you've been holding since Shadowdale without the hot elven archer of the party hearing.
What if the scabbard was like yours but on the back it had a section that went all the way up the guard, wrapped around the edge but was still open on the other side? Since you're wearing it on the back, the part where the blade is exposed would be more or less covered by the wearer but you would still be able to draw it from the back since the scabbard is open halfway. It could've been accomplished with cured leather hide, since you can make it adopt a particular shape when it's been treated.
Rain, dust, humidity would easily go into the scabbard and would damage the blade. You do not spend that much money for a sophisticated blade weapon plus that many extra hours training to be able to use the benefits of a blade effectiveley just to allow to get the blade - the core value of your whole combat philosophy - to be damaged that easily. It is like that a Formula 1 racing team allow the tyres to get damage without reason just because the handling of the tyres which causes the damage looks sooo cool ;)
Rust prevention is literally just wiping the blade with oil or melted lard or something like that. I use literally just canola oil when I wipe to prevent rust on my rifles
13:13 This small editing error shows just how much work goes into making videos like this. Skall like most people, actually has to say each line several times to get it "just right". So, if he has to recite a 15 minute video 4 or 5 times, do the math...That's a long, long time, and a lot of work...
Yeah, no thanks. I also stick to the hip method. 12:55 By the way, it is true that the Japanese wore their Nodachi/Odachi on their back, but not always. If you carry it on most of your way BEFORE the battle, it's understandable because it's more convenient to carry. But into the battle, they always carried it in their hands, with an assistant who helps you unsheath it if it is very long. Some Nodachi were short enough to carry on the hips without much problem.
@@AdrianOkay They are usually made of wide silk stripes or sometimes leather. They can move it because it's not secured in the way European swords were.
For the backpack scabbard idea- If you were to secure a regular scabbard to the side of a pack in such a way that it could pivot when you draw, that would remove the clunky over the shoulder draw (or at least reduce it to manageable levels). The advantage this confers is mainly in weight distribution and keeping everything in one place. I'm not suggesting this is a really practical solution, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to hear it had been done.
For the Romans, I read that rank and file troops wore them on the right not because of the shields, but because it purposely made drawing a bit slower/harder than from the left because war was considered an organized activity that didn't need a quick draw. Discipline was enforced on the troops with this because they should only be drawing their swords when sharpening/maintaining their sword or when ordered to. Centurians on the other hand wore it on the left because they were "above discipline" and wore it on the left as a status symbol. Solid video, and keep up the good work!
Not true about the hundred years war though, they lost that way in Crecy and Azincourt, but their tactics evolved after crecy, and they largely stopped mounted charges at defensive positions as the war went on. It happened again at Azincourt because it appeared as flat terrain and the french army was so large compared to their opponents, and this wasn't a commander decision, but knight's indiscipline, while the commander had ordered a heavy infantry slow advance rather than a cavalry charge. The battle of Cocherel is a good example of the French army's adaptation, with their commander faking a retreat to lure the english out of their defensive position, before turning back and smashing their exposed army. Another example is in the battle of Pontvallin, the french advanced on forced march to attack before the English could fortify their position, destroying their force.
Seriously, just watch Conan the destroyer it has a perfect example of how to ware a sword on the back. It happens when they enter the ruins where the gem is held, specifically watch Conan in the background.
Another option is to just have the sheathe open on the side on the upper portion. Like a slit. I've seen sheath/scabbards like this before (I think even on this channel). This seems to usually be done because of the shape of the sword. If the slit wasn't there, you wouldn't be able to get the sword in/out of the sheath--even on the hip. The swords in question are usually wider near the point and narrower near the hilt leaving one of two options for the sheathe; either make the whole sheathe the same width, or have it shaped the same as the sword but be open on the side halfway up ;). This would not only make it possible to unsheathe a sword on your back, but also fit with how it's done in video games. Rather than clipping through the sheathe, they'd be slipping the sword through that slit ;).
Shadow of Mordor also had a clever solution. For a sword that tapers toward the tip, a special scabbard with a V or U shape cut into it would still protect the edge, and hold the blade firmly in place, but also allow the blade to stick out of the cut portion of the scabbard as it was drawn, preventing the thinner tip from getting caught in it
You showed the picture of Geralt of Rivia but he actually slightly pushes up on his scabbard holster when you draw the blade and putt it away nice detail and no clipping just a side note enjoyed the vid
If I had the proper video equipment i'd film this, but lets say for a proper longsword on the back, with a blade length of oh....lets say 42 1/2 inches to honor my man Geralt's sword size, Simply build a custom full length sheath, then cut an incision in it on the side OPOSITE of the side it would hang, so if the blade was the direction of this slash: /, when hanging on your back, you'd carve the notch in the LEFT side. so, once you did that, you'd coat it in whatever material and fancy it up but be sure to leave that gap down to about half of the blade's length down the sheath. then, you should be able to draw your sword from the back with no issue. TESTED AND CONFIRMED> try it yourselves!
I've actually been working on designing a similar sheath for boffer larp great swords but haven't had the time or materials to build my test build for it
And now? You have to coat the scabbard again and again once you used it? And if not? Dust, rain, humidity would crawl into the scabbard and would damage the blade.
Kindergarten is also used in english. And in HEMA, there are tons of german words used like Federschwert, Messer, Zweihänder, and various techniques have german names.
we stole most of the words in english well 50/60% at least and counting ,,especially more modern or global words ( as do most other languages things like sushi and plastic and zeitgeist certain words get incorporated into most languages,, mostly because it's easier than making up a new word ) and a lot of english and German words share the same root eg, night , nacht- this especially noticeable in scotland where {The words in this list are pronounced exactly the same or almost exactly the same in Danish as in Scots and have the same meaning : - SCOTS DANISH aff af alane alene bairn barn bane ben blae bleg blad blad brent braende claith klaide clart klatte coo ko cruik krykke cruisie kruse dook dykke drucken drukken efter efter forbye forbi fremmit fremmed gang gang gavel gavl greet graede grey - hairit graharet grue gru grund grund hals hals het hed hoose hus ken kunne, kende kilt kilte kirk kirke lang lang ligg ligge lirk lirke lowe lue mair mer moose mus oot ud reek rog rowan ron saip saepe sark saerk sang sang seck saek seik syg siccar sikker skaith skade skellum skaelm skelly skele smaa sma smidd y smedje smool smugle smit smitte soor syre starn, stern stjerne stane sten.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, extract from The Scots Language and Its European Roots by Dr Sheila Douglas}
Boris The OED is the definitive record of the English language, featuring 600000 words, 3 million quotations, and over 1000 years of English.,,, im pretty sure i forgot more than those 3 :)
Strap with a rail system fitted on it and a special scabbard for the rail. That way you can easily slide the scabbard down while pulling with the other hand.
Carrying a sword on your back. "Im transporting my sword, im not preparing for battle, its just transport, be it to the blacksmith or to sell it or what ever" Potentially... "i carry my sword on my back so that i have it with me, but i don't want it to be in the way, so i put it on my back, if i need to draw it, its there... but it will be hard, but i still have it with me and its not really in the way, im more likely to draw my utility knife than my sword in an emergency... but if i see armed men in the distance, i still have time to deal with the issue of pulling out the sword, putting it away is not really needed to be done quickly." Then again, people "back in the day" were induviduals just as today... Im sure they had "this is über leet and cool" mentality just as people do today... Then again... just as today... they had experts with experience (bouth good and bad)... that no one listened to because "i know better hur-dur!" (i have a small suspicion that i may be in this category but i do my best to learn from others, and still experiment my self) /What is written above is nothing but assumptions, speculations and my taughts on things based on my experiences, im not even close to an expert... not even sure im a novice... but still its the internet and needs to be said.
13:30 in your previous video, the one where you said that people would never carry swords on their back, you pulled a sword from a scabbard on your back, and the scabbard was all the way up to the shoulder. And while it might be a lot more troublesome with long swords, for most of history, swords were short!
One thing I thought of regarding full scabbards and sword on the back was if the harness you wore only anchored the scabbard near the shoulder. Like a hinge, so it wouldn't flop around to the sides, though you'd probably want a magnet connection at the bottom as well. That way, when you start to draw it, the scabbard tilts, letting you draw the sword over your shoulder, and then falls back, reconnecting to the magnet so it doesn't flop around.
The sag issue is easily solved with an over the shoulder strap that attaches to the belt. Extra benefits to that are that the soft tube you mentioned could run along the shoulder blade nicely without flopping down behind you and alloeing you to potentially sheath the sword easier as well since the opening would be semi ridgidly mounted to one spot on the shoulder.
I think there's some pictoral evidence of that. Certainly makes sense as a transport method. I'll be another voice for real back carry being a transport method rather than something anyone thought of using to deliver blows right from the scabbard.
See skall, with the sword on your back I instantly want to give you 1000 gold, with it on your side I just want to put you in a disappointing mmo based anime
Easiest solution I can think of is for the scabbard to be open along one side, halfway down. To draw the sword, you would pull up to the length of your arm, and slide it sideways out of the open side. The scabbard would need to be made of harder material, so that the opening doesn't bend closed and make resheathing difficult. But a wooden or thin metal edge could keep it in shape easily enough. This also greatly improves the protection that the scabbard gives to the sword, since it can still go all the way up.
A possible solution to the full scabbard problem is having some sort of mechanism where when the sword is fully seathed, a cover would clasp around the blade when detecting the pressure of the blade in the sheath (it would be easy to do with modern technology, but harder to do purely mechanically), and conversely when the blade is pulled and no long er fully in the sheath the scabbard would loosen around it making it easy to draw. There are a lot of possibilities for how something like this could be implemented, but it would probably make for a very expensive scabbard. A perhaps simpler solution would be to design the scabbard so that it can open up on one side when the sword is being drawn. These are fun problems.
Flinch Fu Wrong; you carry the shield on your back to protect yourself from rocks, lava, and flaming bats. You hold out your wooden Deku Shield to protect against the Deku Nuts.
Skall, I have a hangar/baldric which makes bastard swords/longswords viable for back carry. It involves a pair of L shaped hooks to hold the crossguard in place and a 1/3rd length sheath to protect the percussive part of the edge and down to the point. Its actually really easy to draw and re-sheath.
Big advantage with a back scabbard is if you're running or jogging. If you've ever had to run flat out with a sword on your waist, you know how it tends to flop around (possibly entangling your legs). You can mitigate this by holding the sword in place with one of your hands. Remember though that a sword is a sidearm. If you have a shield in one hand and a polearm or axe in another, there's nothing left to keep the sword steady while you move. Another point is that I don't think the concept of a tactical draw for a sidearm was as universally accepted before modern times. It might simply be a case of the sword being slung where it is easiest to carry over long distances rather than were it's easiest to access. There's a reason we use backpacks and not waistpacks, after all. A back-scabbard user might simply plan on taking the time to shrugging off the entire baldric and scabbard before drawing if he ever needed to use the weapon. Perhaps he'd even shift the sword to his waist only when he was sure he was going to get in a fight and not before.
endomobo Or even better, lazy animations. In Dragon Age every character wears the weapon on the back and if you look closely, you can see it floating a bit behind the back :D Also scabbards don't seem to exist in that Game
the arm argument is kinda overused if you look around there are plenty of videos of people using both hands to unsheath the sword. Even if a sword is on your waist you typically use one hand to keep the sheath in place and the other to draw which is how people draw katanas.
I have seen (not on camera, with my eyes) a No-dachi (japanese twohanded sword) being drawn from the back by simultaneously pulling the scabbard down, so to speak. I am guessing that the fact that the scabbard is rigid adds to the usefulness of that drawing technique. And a good example of irrational behavior and its historical presence. 😊
Hi Skall. Thank you for the video. If I'm not mistaking, the ninja wore small swords (ninjato) on their backs and pulled them by drawing the blade with the right hand and pulling the scabbard down with the left hand. The rope/belt that was used to hold the scabbard was not carried around the waist area but rather as a backpack (at least this is what we did in training sessions). Cheers!
Two proposals, first you have a large wooden sheath that is wide enough that the sword is able to articulate and come out with a normal arm motion. This would be functional in the flat style of cross guards that could basically fit flush against the* slot. The other is basically Shad's idea/style with the cut out. As long as you have a proper shape for the hilt I will seal the top and the bottom is arguably the hardest place for water to get in. (obviously humidity exists, but then again if you had a sword you weren't usually poor and were trained and expected to care for all your gear, in other words oiling your sword wasn't some rocket science level of thinking outside your norm.) Also you would be able to wear a cloak to keep the rain out in most cases if it was terribly bad (or you just live in Brittain ;) ) and when you need to stop your blade the fighting is done anyway so you have time to deal with the layering issues. Bonus Idea I'm curious about the use of shield scabbards, you only really see them in fantasy like the fabled back scabbard but I also think it would be very viable especially with shields strapped to your arm. Most scabbards are a fairly tight fit so it won't just slide out even if riding on horse back (not going to go into the details but just know that there was already something especially for that anyway) and it would give you a very deadly striking surface if you're using a spear/polearm and someone gets inside your reach. Punch, fallback and swing with your main. Keeps you from throwing down your main weapon and possibly losing a reach advantage while remaining deadly to non-helmeted foes.
One way to carry on the back would be to lay it horizontally below the small of your back. Have leather loops on the scabbard to fit along the belt acting like a holster. Of course, this works best with shorter blades vs longer ones. But, that's the best way possible I'm aware of. As a whole... what I find is that in history most back scabbards are for two handed swords, and usually you unsheath by grabbing the scabbard with one hand and tilting it to give the hand used to draw the blade a bit of leverage and allow for a cleaner draw. Otherwise... for all practical purposes the carry at the hip is the simplest solution to a wide variety of blades and gets the job done. There's a reason more people do it that way than any other method. Not because the other methods cant be done, but often there's no point comparatively speaking to the belt carry method. I often go out hunting and hiking and I tend to keep some sort of machete or similar type of blade on my person for such an event. One is a bit long, and so it carries great on the hip. The other is short but with a thick broad blade, and on the sheath it does have the loops to go on the belt. I tried to carry it by the hip where the hilt would stick out a bit beyond my leg. I found that didnt work well at all, but the small of the back was perfect, even when I had a pack on the back as well. But that's more or less the ONLY blade I own that truly carries better that way. While I have others I can carry that way, they just arent as efficient on the draw or as comfortable that way. I dont really have two handed blades anymore, as I mostly had those when I was more into fantasy swords and such. But, the method I mentioned above I found to be effective with a couple of them that I had. But it's more conditional to having a two handed blade in my opinion.... Anything one handed carried over the shoulder is for style not function in my eyes.
when you're walking a long ass time, you''re going to throw out your back and hips having a sword swinging around off one side. Stow that thing, when you might need it you get it off your back - who wouldn't think to just loop their scabbard over something on their pack? Get over it, you're not going strait to combat in seconds - if you are, draw a dagger, anyway? Arguing against the dramatic "time to fuck shit up" draw from the back? Sure, that probably didn't happen a bunch. when shit hits the fan, you're probably going to try to shrug off your pack and anything else you can, anyway, being nimble enough to not die is pretty important. There's also plenty of situations where you wouldn't mind people seeing that you're armed, but it would be terrible manners to have your sword at the ready.
For the average soldier (who actually has a sword instead of a cheaper weapon like a spear), you'd want to wear it on the hip for an easy draw. Whether on the march or heading into battle, it needs to be at a ready position. Putting the sword away wouldn't matter. If you are putting it away, then whatever danger is passed and you can very well take your scabbard off if you have to, to sheathe your weapon. But I could absolutely see a very good use for a sword on the back, and that would be for recon scouts on foot. You want to be able to run or at least move very quickly. You don't expect to engage the enemy per se, but you still want to have your weapon with you. A spear would be unwieldy in this case, even a bow might be. A sword on the hip might trip you up trying to run, crawl, and move around in dense foliage trying to get a close enough spot to see the enemy without being seen. A sword on the back however, would help you to maneuver quickly and easily, while still having a prime weapon you can get to fast enough to have ready if an enemy is approaching your position. Why this might be an ahistorical scenario is that I don't remember reading anywhere that medieval armies had dedicated scouting forces, or specialized forces much at all. It seems they generally appointed random soldiers, usually light infantry for the task of attempting to scout out enemy forces. Other forms of scouting, such as keeping an eye on what is ahead or behind a marching army were left to light cavalry forces. Posted scouts were there to raise alarm and not really an active searching force and was a duty shared by all regular infantry. Other than that, I suspect some people simply put their scabbards on their back when in friendly territory and it was for comfort, not any sort of tactical reason, just like slinging anything on your back is a naturally comfortable way to carry something.
One thing that came to my mind about this; (main problem obviously being that your arm is shorter so you can't pull a sword from a full sized scabbard) is doing what the Japanese do, I noted that when they unsheat their katanas, they pull the scabbard in the opposite direction, so the blade is free of it sooner, likewise, when sheating the weapon, the pull the scabbard closer to it. So a possible solution could be making so that the straps holding the scabbard are somewhat elastic, so you can pull the bottom with one hand and pull the sword with the other; of course this will make the drawing of the sword a 2 handed matter, so using a shield with this setup could be difficult if is not a small one, plus you would have to get your chest exposed while drawing your sword. The best option would be to only ever use a shortsword if you want to carry it on the back.
Skall don't forget about the Italian Rennaisance era Mass produced Arming swords. They had a clip mechanism integrated into the guard, where you would just unhook it for use
Maybe these warriors took the scabbard off before the fight? That is if you know you are going to fight. And maybe that was the case with any scabbard, it isn't very handy to have anything obstructing your movement while fighting. WWII and modern long range recon teams have a LOT to carry and they are not fighting with that weight on (well, atleast I don't think they do). Just a thought...
A far better set up if you're going to wear a sword on your back is one that is the length of your forearm positioned on the small of your back, hilt facing away from the side the hip sword is on. In this way you can grab it from the opposite hand and go in from a side stab in the areas where there are vulnerabilities in the enemy's armor. This would only be done in close corridor locations like storming a castle where archers are not going to be shooting at you. If you are in a location with archers then you need a shield. So if I were in a field battle, I probably wouldn't bother with the additional weight but in a castle seige, I would probably ideally want a shield that I can throw on my back at any given moment, a hip sword and a secondary short sword on the small of my back. Maybe I would have shields built for my army with handles on both sides, that way you could instantly pick one up on the battlefield if need be and defend with it, instead of fumbling with the edge of the shield to get a hold of it when it's facing down. The fact that it wasn't done probably means that it wasnt so much a big deal but nevertheless could help.
What you could do is have a slit in the scabbard large enough for your sword to fit through that way you can have your scabbard go to the guard and have less concern with elements, cutting yourself and it could be a third weapon that could be on your person. For example, a person could have their primary be a spear, secondary be their sword and then around the waist have a small one handed ax. It could be pulled off rather well with good design.
It's comfortable to wear sword on the back, when you go through the bushes or climb rocks or cross some water, in other cases that's not so, cause it takes long time to unshealth your blade - unless it's short like wakidzashi or you have some hi-tec special shealth.
In Shadow of Mordor, the main character draws his sword from the back, but has a special scabbard with a slit in the side that the sword goes through. For all the craziness in that game, that was a nice little detail.
Yeah this...
As far as I'm aware none of the historical youtubers have even mentioned that in any of these "sword on back" videos.
Awesome! I didn't know that was a thing in those games! I had the same idea, though. Perfect solution. It would solve the problem of clipping through the sheathe in other games, too ;). I came up with the idea when trying to figure out how to get that to work with my Link cosplay. I never got to implement it, though, since I went with a pre-made sheathe rather than making my own, lol.
@@peacereaper5987 well you said it, historical =/= fantasy
@@peacereaper5987 THANK YOU. The fact that no one has talked about it is frustrating, as I'm very curious to as if it could actually work.
Witcher 3 shows Geralt's scabbards can kinda tilt out so he doesn't just pull it upwards. But uh... The game models still clip.
Use a Mace :
1. Effective against armor and shields.
2. Easy to forge.
3. Does not need to be sharpened.
4. Does not require complicated extraordinary techniques to use.
5. Easy to draw from back.
6. Looks intimidating and villainious.
7. Legal to carry.
8. -Who is the strongest Jedi Knight?
-MACE Windu.
Legal? Lol well in my country all weapons are legal, but I like a good solid blunt weapon as much as the next guy
@@jhanks2012 you are lucky then. In my country you can only carry weapons that aren't longer than your index finger. And good to see a fellow mace warrior. Cheers :)
@@oguzhantavus4237 That sounds vastly unfair ... The larger the man the longer the weapon he may carry? I think the littler guys need the longer ones to stand a fair chance
@@jhanks2012 i totally agree with you. The government officials aren't smart enough to think like this. Good thing is the rules are for sharp weapons which doesn't include maces :)
@@oguzhantavus4237 i see :) well those same alt-left type government hacks are in my country too, they just haven't been able to successfully overthrow our Constitution yet which protects us! I guess if they ever do then I'll be an outlaw because I will sure never be unarmed! :D
I still find it likely that the idea of a sword on the back came from people observing sword wielders walking around with their swords outside of combat. If you have a larger sword, it seems rather comfortable and practical to sling your sword over your shoulder much like a rifle. In combat we often have a rifle across our front, but when not in combat, we often swing them across our shoulder on the back.
Very true. And as a professional combat arms soldier, I meet a lot of people who freak out and claim that a rifle on your back has no validity. Those people have never carried or run guns for a living. Similarly, there are dozens of ways to carry a rifle when expecting contact. People who say "You cannot do that" or "No one does this" usually don't have enough experience to know what living under arms actually entails.
I could see the exact same thing being true of swords. You aren't ALWAYS in combat. But that chances are good that people, like today, always carried arms.
Its not like it cant be done. Some people like to try something different and eith practice and specialized gear it makes things more practical as well. For example while hunting most folks will walk in with a sling rifle on their shoulder. Few of them however can quickly bring that gun to bear if need be. However i do know some that can. And with practice i learned that there are a couple tiny adjustments and quirks that not only make it easier to do but nearly as fast if not faster than a forward slung position. I once watched a buddy not only do that swing around from the back but aim fire and kill in one shot a running deer going full out only a few dozen yrds away. It was one of the single slickest moves i have ever seen in real life with a firearm. It honestly couldve been cut right out of a green screen from any number of movies
derek leverknight from what you’re describing a visual reference for that would be in shutter island Leonardo DiCaprio does a similar thing with his rifle from the position of sling over shoulder he flips it around with one hand off his shoulder and into a combat stance really quickly which I thought was neat because I’ve never seen someone do that. Granted it’s probably not as epic as the John Wick level of deer hunting your friend did but it sounds similar to me
I think I know what you are talking about. You swing the butt of the rifle around from under neath, causing the barrel to sweep the ground, and the butt swings right up into your shoulder. Just make sure no one is standing behind you, haha. It is a neat trick I have tried before.
Back when the Norwegian army used G3s we had them on the back (with the pipe pointing down), and we learned to quickly swing them under the right arm into a firing position. Even worked with a backpack. You could also carry it with the pipe pointing up, but you'd have to swing the weapon around in such a way that the pipe pointed to everyone behind you to get it into a firing position, which is not safe. It's also slower.
Now with our hk416s we carry them on the right side instead (or left if you're a lefty). Main difference is the G3 weighted twice as much and the sling was clipped to the weapon at two points instead of just one like normal.
"you can't draw the sword from the back" is actually no argument whatsoever against CARRYING the sword on the back. Especially the larger swords may even require to be carried on the back. In those cases people would simply remove the entire scabbard from the back and then draw the sword.
I agree, it seems like there is perhaps too much focus being put on "how fast can I go from carrying position to ready for battle"
i have seen the next argument somewhere i can't remember where: the character The Hound from Game of Thrones has a normal arming sword on his hip for the "i'm under attack i need to get my sword out fast" time, but also has a longsword on his back which he takes out when thing get messy and needs to "take out the big guns"
With larger swords you can just carry them like a polearm by resting the flat of the blade on your shoulder.
@@88porpoise Well if it's something like a great sword then it would require two hands to use anyways, though you do have a point about the blade being exposed.
Djinn Iblis even with a larger sword all you’d do is quickly remove the strap and draw it from a different position. You don’t have to keep it in your carrying position to draw it. It’s exactly the same concept behind a gun sling, you can’t use it while carrying it on your back but it frees up your hands to do so and is loads easier not is it at all difficult to take it off and quickly ready it. In fact this would be exactly using a back holster for a rifle.
My argument would be: Travel with a sword on your back. A longsword you would use in a large fight. Then, use a dagger or shorter sword on the hip for ambushes etc.
A futuristic scabbard that opens when the owner of the sword grips the sword's hilt. 100% practical idea. Yes, I'm aware that I'm a genius, I watch Richard and Mortimer after all.
also mass effect, also warframe, also dead space...
Gun wants to say hello
that or magnets. Actually both ideas have already been done, although I think it would be cheaper to attach some kind of button to the sword hilt.
@@Nerobyrne the problem with magnets is if you just stuck your sword to a magnet on your back it would leave the blade exposed.
@@tawoorie to be fair the firearms in Mass Effect don't go into holsters they just fold or collapse into smaller configurations and magnetize to the armor.
What if the clay doll is just a dirty joke about the front sword and back sword. Kind of like that joke, "this is my rifle, this is my gun. This one is for fighting, this one for fun."
Humor wasn't invented back then. This is well assumed :P
I don't people in the past knew what humor was that is definitely a modern invention
Lmao
LMAO!
this is my sword this is my sword, this is for fighting this is for fun......
this needs to be a thing in a fantasy game, a bunch of knights on a march singing that cadance lolz
@@darthXreven more like "this is my blade, this is my sword! This one's for fighting, this one's for fun!" Lmao, still a goo,d funny cadence because of soldier's humor.
the only time i can see wearing your Long/Greatsword on your back being practical is if you are traveling long distances and traversing difficult terrain (having your sword on your back makes it easier to climb with it out the way.) but you know that you are not likely to run into any real danger such as enemies.
my view is that only short swords like a xiphos can set on one's back since long swords may got jammed in the scarboard if it was carried at the back.
Much like hunters have the rifle on their pack when hiking.
You can just drop it from your back the way you drop a backpack in case there's danger.
That was my understanding of historical carries on the back. It was just easier to keep a very long sword from knocking against everything and dragging on the ground during travel. But, if you expected to be assailed or go into battle, you'd already have the sword drawn in preparation.
You woukd Not Carry a Great sword on jour back or on The waist since a Great sword is usually bigger then a normal sized adult like Great sword Are HUGE
The only scenario where wearing it on the back is for long distance traveling. And it would be a part of the whole backpack system.
Cause bumping your leg for miles and miles on end would drive anyone crazy as hell.
The most logical and relatable comment about this subject
Omfg! I wear a 20 inch hammer at work and it'll swing in between my legs when I pick up the pace, tripping me or smacking a leg well. Sure it may be in part to a bad mount but people tend to make equipment work for them, even if sub optimale
Why is everybody concerned with, wearing a sword on your back, and drawing a sword on your back? When I was in the Marine Corps, you have your rifle slung on your front, ready , but when needing to negotiate obstacles, or detain individuals, or in Garrison, you would sling it on your back. Why do we keep talking about this? If an attack happens, when the rifle/sword is on your back, you move it to your front, and present/draw the weapon...
Sheathing
Nerds have the idea in their head that any threat requires an instantaneous response or else death is certain.
Wearing on the back for carry purposes only probably happened if it was just used for battle (ex. a longsword that's too long to carry comfortably on your waist) and you don't have a horse or donkey to carry your stuff around. Get a piece of rope or a proper scabbard and you can walk around all day with the thing on your back no problem, you get jumped and you still have your travel stick/spear/one-handed backup to fend off the enemy if you don't have that 5 seconds it takes to get the scabbard off your shoulder and unsheathe the thing.
Carrying a longsword on the waist is still ok. But carrying a greatsword there would be too hard. And yeah if i'd go on a long journey i would carry a sword on my back...
That's what I thought aswell. this makes more sense in my opinion. although I really like the look of swords on the back
If you ever looked at Japanese painting the ainu, the always had their big katana worn on their back. But material that we have show that they worn sword from a strap over the neck on the shoulder, hanging around the waist. But those sword look to be shorter.
Clarence Baluca
Ninjas wear it on their waist behind their back. It's different than slinging it over your shoulder.
Over your shoulder really only makes sense for travel purposes with a longer blade.
Of course for shorter weapons, it's always been on your hip. Like arming swords or if you're taller, longswords.
@Cliven Longsight you're really underestimating the advantage of having a free hand that you can use for whatever you want, particularly good the walking stick part if you end up walking on a really poor road that rides on a mountain, if you ever went on long treks you know how convenient a single stick can be to keep the pace.
Reminds me of reverse-grip for swords.
Can you pull it off? Yes.
Does it come with some severe drawbacks? Yes.
Did some people do it? Probably yes.
Is it way more prevalent in media than it should be? Also yes.
To be completely fair though, usually reverse grip is shown for shorter blades or daggers, not as much with long swords.
@@DragonEdge10
Using a knife that way is perfectly fine. It only becomes an issue if you use longer blades that way.
That is my theory. People back then probably thought it looked just as cool as people nowadays do.
No I disagree, reverse grip especially with a long sword is just ridiculous and infeasible. Where as having a sword on your back can be done and it makes little difference except that the blade is exposed to the elements (at least with Skall's design).
@@kram9863
Look up Skalls video in handling a sword with reverse-grip. You can do it, it just sucks
Hey man, would really appreciate if you made a video explaining the roles of pages, squires, and man-at-arms.
Ooh, I like this idea. Seconded.
nice
That would certainly be an interesting topic for him to cover.
Pages serve at courts, squires follow their lord to battle, man at arms sre regular soldiers who could afford good equipment
Shadowstar pages and squires primary function was to help the knight draw his back mounted sword.
7:11 @Skallagrim I took a class in college that was half academic study and half immersion exercise about Roman legionaries, including training in marching, formation, and combat (a little). Of course, we had shields, and I can confirm that marching around carrying them is a significant pain in the ass. We wore our swords on the right, so that wasn't as much of a problem, but we were constantly getting smacked in the shins and ankles by both our own shields and our classmates'. We also had issues with the grip and inside of the shield boss chafing against the wrist, to the point that most of us added some sort of cushion or layered fabric as an improvised guard against that.
Oh and by the way, our professor actually used your video on the gladius as learning material in the class! Thought you might want to know that your content has seen at least some educational use :)
attention everyone: YES, people in the middle ages did cary swords on their backs for purley transportation purposes, however they did not draw them from the back, they would take it off and attach the belt and scabbard around the waist if they intended to use it in the near future.
attention everyone:
what are your SOURCES? without sources, you're just saying random stuff and expecting others to believe you. at least with a source, you have some kind of justification (that can be referenced) for the things that you say
In halloween skall resurrects a dead topic
That's what makes it extra spooky
Doot
ITS SO SPOOPY
I SHIDED AND FARTED.
Speaking of Halloween. Skellys carrying swords within their own ribcages. I mean there is nothing important in there anyway so why not use the space?
He resurrects it then ends it rightly
The legend says it is easy to unscrew the pommel if you had the sword on your back
salih Yılmaz indeed
it even easier to do from the belt, extremely so
Türk bulmanin mutlulugu...
Gardaşım bi ihtiyacın var mı kardaşım!
salih Yılmaz I guess that would allow for a more non-telegraphic toss... and putting your sword away first would add more insult to injury- I mean death...
How about a bunch of paper scabbards you cut through every time?
That gets rid of the purpose of the scabbard, protecting the blade from weathering.
Too much hassle when you could just have it on your hip.
It also is impractical to move with that, it would cut out of the scabbard (or in your case, sheath) on its own just by shifting.
@@firebembum4751
The joke ----->
Your head
@@pubcle I just addressed a suggestion pragmatically. How am I supposed to discern through text when people are serious or not? More to the point, how are you?
@@pubcle The whole "woosh" thing is rarely used in a way where the person isn't making an assumption. If there's nothing in the statement to imply it, it's not really over the person's head. I've seen plenty of comments like that in seriousness.
It's not being hostile and I'm certain it's a joke because firstly, he has Anonymous as his pfp, which generally indicates troll. Secondly, the sword wouldn't just slice through at movement, it would slice through when putting it in the scabbard in the first place. Third, this is just clearly mocking people who go over the top to try and defend things. "Woosh" is the equivalent of a light hearted nudge on the shoulder to remind people of sense, it's not a hostile thing, I don't know why you seem to be taking it so seriously.
Obversechaos
I don't know where you're getting that. For instance, when I watched some videos about MHA and he kept making jokes how the invisible character was in every scene in the opening but deadpanned the delivery, it's still a woosh when people go "is she really in all those scenes?"
What do you think of Shad's design for a back-scabbard?
@@usualrain7082 agreed
I actually thought this is some kind of response video to the Shadiversity back scabbard design, both clips being no so long a part.
I love that scabbard design. Thankyou for being the first to bring it up.
The Sabbard is... a really clever design. I like it and I'm impressed by how practical the design appears to be.
@@usualrain7082 Shadman?
I try to think about things like this in a modern setting. People often carry there hand guns in different positions for different reasons. For example a cross draw is usually not the best way to draw a firearm but if you are in a job that you are sitting a lot of the time like a taxi driver it might be more useful. People also sometimes carry in different ways because they find it more comfortable. It wouldn't be hard to imagine the same thing applied to people in history. I also have no doubt there may have been people back then that were "tacticool" just like today so would carry in a way to look good rather then it being practical.
Royalty were probs the most tacticool
I can see that I used to use an in the beltline concealed holster that made it to where only a little bit of the grip showed. Now I usually stick my gun in my jeans back right pocket because it's more comfortable. The only time I really sit is when I'm in my truck so I just take it out the pocket and put it in the glove box. Draw back I can see is someone behind me could easily see it and if stupid enough try to take it. Problem there is while I keep a full mag in it I have the safety on and no round chambered and the Ruger sr9c for those that aren't familiar with it is not an easy weapon to figure out. Not impossible though. Is definitely have enough time to break their nose for trying.
I always wondered: how practical a shield with a built-in scabbard for a short sword would be?
Most shields were relatively disposable. So putting extra effort in it (which doesn't increase durability at the same time) is probably not worth your time
@@antonuramer most scabbards were relativly disposable aswell.
sounds like an interessting idea but slighlty impractable sheilds are already heavy enough without a sword there aswell
plus you either have to carry a heavier shield by hand, or if it's on your back, you'd have to get it off before you draw your sword.
Well to draw such short sword you would probably need to lower your shield to draw it so it makes you vulnerable for a second, also it ads weight to your shield as you are carrying it which would be more tiring and in a long run give you some spinal problems. It would look cool though :D
Otto Pike Maybe a short backup weapon mounted low on the shield to allow drawing.
I know its fiction, but I like the idea that they point out in A song of ice and fice. When John receives long claw, Mormont tells him "that sword is too long, you'll have to wear it on your back or it will get in the way". Later on any time, he feels he might have need of it, "John loosened long claw of its scabbard" pointing that he cant just pull the sword off his back easily, he has to loosen it first. This probably means undoing a fasting on the top to leave a short portion of the sword in the scabbard. In the show, It seems in some scenes that he actually has to take the scabbard all the way off his back to pull the sword out. This kinda makes sense, and the loosening would be of the scabbard itself so he can sling it off his back relatively quickly. But agreeing with a lot of other comments it seems the carry on the back was more for travel and practicality of the sword not getting in the way, and the person wearing it would take the scabbard off their backs and pull, or switch to wearing it on their side when they felt the need to be battle ready.
that, combined with the Witcher Screenshot just gave me an Idea: when the scabbard is mounted on the Belt at just one Point, it leaves it free to swing. so, if the scabbard would be high enough to prevent accidental cutting and had a secondary strap near the lower tip, you could, for emergency, unfasten your secondary strap and pull the sword out from the now free-swinging scabbard. (kinda like rolling the Blade over your shoulder, as it is often depicted.) of course, you now have a free-swinging scabbard,, which, i imagine, would be irritating. would bee ann iinteresting concept to test, i think.
If what you say is true, the sword from the books is totally different from the series. In the series it's definitely short enough to carry in the hip.
@@leandrog2785 It should be mentioned that the show changed characters ages, Jon snow was younger, and thus smaller, then he was portrayed in the show.
In the book this is correct but in the show Jon carried it at the waist.
@@leandrog2785 The sword in the book is "a bastard sword for a bastard" when he got it.
The Metatron covered this topic once with the nodachi. The blade was so large that it had to be carried on the back. Is difficult to draw the blade but it was a battlefield weapon so it was no big deal. Is posible for one person to draw it alone but if there is help available that would be preferable. Obviously os not drawn from the back it was taken off and draw from the side. He said that the name also gave some clues on how it was used.
I always thought the same about this topic, drawing it from the back is nuts, but a full built scabbard with a strap is really useful. You take it off, and take the balde out. Just like modern rifles and shotguns, they are in the back, you pull them off and you use them. If someone charges at you, you have your dagger on medieval combat, or your knife and gun in modern.
Didn't metatron also show a way that you can draw a katana from the back? Have the scabbard only attached near the shoulder and when drawing pull the scabbard down while drawing the sword.
I think he did. I don't remember the details but I remember see something like that.
"This is not suddenly a great way to wear a sword"
Shad: yes.
Two questions: 1) What about wearing the sword on the back while riding horseback? Not into battle, just getting to a destination. 2) What about a scabbard that has an opening on the side near the top that would allow the tip to be pulled out sideways as the blade is being drawn?
Wearing a scabbard on your back while traveling is no problem at all. It doesn't matter really if you ride on a horse or go by foot.
But if you ride a horse, you can attach the scabbard on the saddle as well.
About the second point, that's also what I think of as an 'ideal' combination of backmounted blades and blade protection.
1. While not fond of the idea of back scabbard, I am not entirely against the possibility that swords can be worn on the back for logistic reasons. But then again anything can be worn on the back for logistic reasons.
2. I believe in combat is it more practical to wear it at the waist. Smooth and quick unsheathing of a sword from the back as been proven possible many times over but sheathing it has always been problematic. It is not about possibility here, yes it is possible. But with enough engineering I can wear the sword on my scrotum too.
Did you ever do horse riding with a sword? And did you do combat manouvering on a horse with sword? From time to time it hapoens that you fell off the horse. And you are happy not to increase the chance to break your spine because your back has a scabbard attacjed to it once it hit the ground. The risk of having major injuries to your hip becaus you have a scabbard at the side is big enough.
There is really no single reason to have ot on your back. Most important point: the scabbard is needed so much to protect the extreme expensive and important blade. With a full scabbard it is not possible to draw the sword from the back. And even a little slit to the side of the scabbard to make drawing easier or even possible will increase the damage to the blade just because it is exposed to air, dust, humidity.
Once you spend the amount of the money equal to what you would spend for a small car for a 100percent replica of a medieval sword, you will very fast learn to value the scabbard.
If you're already traveling via horse, it's easier to hang sword and scabbard on the saddle. It's as Skall said, there's almost no historic findings of back scabbards and it's because they make not much sense. When you travel on foot, you already have a lot of shit on your back and every added weight makes it worse. So it's better to distribute the weight a bit and since a sword makes more sense on the waist anyway, just leave it there. Added to that, when you were rich enough to own a sword (talking only medieval Europe here tbh), there was a high chance that you also had servants. So just let them carry it with the rest of your stuff.
Just attach it to the saddle lol, your marsh horse will not complain
Oh jeez I am early today. Last time I was this early, bronze was still the dominant material for swords
Have you heard about our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ?
@@jondeoliveira8248 you mean the spadroon?
Have you heard of the high elves?
All hail the holy spadroon, flexible be its thrusts and feeble its cuts.
@@ikksksknsk4720 I am just trying to upgrade him to the Iron Age.
How about a scabbard that are only attached at the top below your shoulder so when you draw it the scabbard “pivot” on your back (the top stays close to where it is, the end/point lifts from your back so the scabbard is somewhat vertical when you draw), so you more pull the sword forward vs upwards?
That way it would bounce some more on your back, but you would get some more “pulling length”.
@Jesse Hughes Yes. A good game. My idea was something like that
I'd think the issue with that would be now you don't really have a secure scabbard. It'd jostle and slap at your back as you walk/ride a horse or whatever else. Wouldn't be terribly comfortable for long journeys.
F3N01 Could loosen/secure with a small string at your left hip.
However the problem is blade length, you can only pull so far from the shoulder of the same shoulder.
The sword still needs to be shorter than your arm. The swords in The Witcher always clip through the scabbard because of this.
In the witcher 3 u can see geralt do this exact thing. I also suggested it
As far as I know, Landsknechts transported their battle swords (zweihanders/flamberge) on their backs due to how long they were and due to the fact, that they had a normal sword on the side as well. And I do mean transported, not used a back scabbard. I believe there was some period imagery, though most I could find was them just throwing it over the shoulder and holding it by the pommel.
And about the Witcher - in the first game it's clearly shown that Geralt yanks the sword and throws it into the air and then catches it (it's also how he pulls it out in the books, sadly - he does that only with a steel sword, and not with both) and in the second game you can see that the scabbard is cut open on left side in the top, and he pulls it most of the way then twists it around to pull the rest through that opening on the side.
rubbers3 , Landsknechte were soldiers and they had logisitics. Like a modern soldier won t carry a machine gun for longer distances but put it on a truck. Landsknechte would use a cart. However for mid and short marches they would carry the Zweihänder like polearms on the back. Carrying it on the back would also make sense. However, the length could cause troubles as the tip would either touches your legs making marching uncomfortable or it may touch your neighbor in the marching formation causing trouble to them.
I imagine this sort of sheath would also help in wet conditions. You often hear from historical accounts that after a lot of humidity or lots of rain, it would either be impossible or very hard to draw, as the wood in the sheath would expand, and the metal would rust, causing a bond. With less sheath covering the sword, you could probably draw it much easier. In this case too, you could possibly keep your sword more covered by a cloak/coat on your back, or even under a pack you hold on your shoulders, preventing it from rusting as much as it normally would. Just supposition, but I wanted to mention it.
Great video! Interesting facts about Celtic warriors, graves and figurines.
Emperor Qin was buried with 8000 terra cotta warriors comprising his afterlife army. Some of the figures depict warriors with a scabbard across the back. Additionally, historical Chinese art depicts figures wearing of the scabbard across the back.
IMO there are two types of depictions shown. One type appears to be a "low scabbard" which could allow for sword draw. The other type appears to be "slung" so that the sword and scabbard would be first brought over the arm and then drawn.
Why wear a sword on the back? The Qin warriors appear to be specialists with very long sword types and may have worn their weapons on the march according to the regulations of their army. Other artwork implies several conditions with the sword on the back:
- wandering Daoist monk or immortal; keeps the sword out of the water when fording at shallow crossings. Crossings through moving water often employ both hands and a staff for stability. Trailing the sword in the moving water seems to have a lot of downsides.
- immortal riding in boat; perhaps it was polite to wear the sword high and across the back, so as not to poke holes in the leather hull and sink the other immortals riding in the boat.
- warrior crossing across from one ship on rope bridge to another ship while at sea; appears to be a transfer operation rather than a hostile boarding.
Historical photos of Japanese riflemen with swords show them wearing the scabbard across the back, usually associated with a maritime setting.
Across-the-back carry appears to be primarily oriented towards logistics and environment rather than immediate readiness to deploy/employ the weapon.
Skall, France did not "not try" to create an analog to english archers - it tried, it was called frank archers. The problem was it did not work - englishmen basically had a lot of hunters in certain areas, who lived and died with their bow, so they naturally made good archers, and France, being more agrarian, actually discouraged hunting for their people, so when the need came, they simply could not make enough. It's just like with mongolians - they were born on the horse and they hunted for living, so they had endless mobilisation reserve of skilled horsed bowmen.
Pragmatism is like... well... Let's talk today. The strongest army in the world today is american, the second is russian, the third is chinese. If we apply your logic, we will just say "it's obvious that to be a strong army, you nedd to have a dozen carriers, so why, oh why does not Russia building any? On the opposite - they (well, we) focus on mechanized infantry, tanks ands all sorts of armored warfare", but in reality the answer to this question is clear if you only look at the map - USA is basically an island empire and did not fought on it's own soil for a hundred years, where Russian potential battles all lie on the land - whether it is Europe, China, or the middle-east, and russia almost always fought the major wars on it's own territory. And even if Putin decided that we need two dozen carriers - how would they help, really?
So yeah, pragmatism always there, it's just not in the parts of the picture, but in a whole of it
aircraft carriers and a big navy in general is necessary if you want to project your force all over the world, you won't invade anyone unless you have the means to deliver large numbers of troops quickly. Besides, the ability to bring the fight to your enemy's territory means you won't suffer many civilian and infrastructure loss. Russia doesn't build a big navy because it would be seen as a signal of them getting on the offensive, while a large land army is seen as defensive.
That and the fact that russia has a limited number of warm water ports and they're in areas that are easily blockaded. From what I understand their northern coast isn't very useful for ships due to the ice. Granted this applies to trading far more than it does to a navy, but still.
Well, it's not totally accurate - i mean, even with the current navy Russia projects well enough where it needs to project. And if we remember soviet union - it projected it's power across half the planet, while still being massively over... fleeted by USA? Wrong word, but you get the point.
It's a question of where you want to fight and with what exactly.
Well, yeah, it's sort of the reason why Crimea happened, from the military point of view.
But again - it's exactly what I said - military in every country is built in the way to serve the country's needs, and not because of some universal standarts of "right" or "reasonable"
@@arx3516 and the fact that russia pretty much can drive/walk to anywhere they would want to invade (asia, europe, africa), unlike the us, who needs the navy to project power to these regions.
Ok, so the only realistic version of wearing a sword on the back ive heard, is in a book I was reading, cant remember off the top of my head, but the character in that book had a bastard ish sized sword, and the thing with the scabbard was it was open on one side half way up as a method of drawing the blade quicker, this was used quite a few times to surprise his opponents, to me this sort of made it viable.
Could be The Witcher.
No, it was similar to Joe Abercrombie's books, but I dont think it was one of his
Have you ever read R. A. Salvatore? You just described a barbarian named Berkthgar and how he had his flamberge sheathed to his back.
Looking at the covers it may well have been that, I recall it not having monsters so im not too sure, im actually looking through all my books now to see if I still have it xD
@@xNanukax no it would have had monsters in it. Berkthgar was only in the books to give the good guys an extra ally in a war against dark elves.
I had an idea for a sword scabbard that funnels and coils on the way up, so that you can twist it while drawing, perhaps having a slit along the back for the blade to come out
While probably not historical, there are modern swords with a scabbard meant for back wear that is split starting from about half way up just for this purpose.
In my Eyes, it's a pretty good alternative for scouts or military rangers, people moving through forest, kneeling and climbing but also carrying a swort with them.
If the swort being out of the way is more important than being a milisecond faster. For example shorter "tool-weapons" like machetes are often carried at the lower back to have free space for moving your legs
IIRC, the Witcher author mentioned that many of the Witcher smiths at Kaer Mohren would use a two-fold process to make a back mounted sheath functional. The first part was a spring loaded sheath, specifically in the tip of the sheath. The Witcher would grab the pommel, press downward and then start to pull the blade out, as this would release the pin style lock on the spring, allowing tension from the spring itself to release. The second part was a snap-held upper third of the sheath. The left side of the upper part of the sheath was held on with a double, small, snap based divot (for right handed draws and vice versa for left handed draws) and would often be pulled away as the sword was drawn and retrieved later. Geralt complained of this constant retrieval in one of the books and I can’t remember if it was ever improved upon or not. Always thought that was an interesting attempt in a fantasy world to non-magically explain a functional full coverage back mounted sheath.
The next step is to get Skall to admit the Katana is his favorite sword; pommel or not!
As *best* sword, mind you.
Your profile pic makes me angry...I like the tactic.
fuck, you got me
Fuck, I mistook your profile pic for a hair again 😑
And that's why the dark theme in youtube app is great lol
It could also be like the trope of people wearing armor all the time while travelling. You won't wear your plate armor all the time, either. Both go on the backpack, and the dagger stays on the.belt. if you are getting attacked, use the dagger, and after dropping the backpack , you can draw the sword from there, easily. You would drop your burden, anyway, if you need to fight.
I'm halfway through the video but I have to mention something.
I once saw something in Skyrim that made me think that sword on back was viable and actually pretty good.
So, it's the way your character carries the Ancient Draugr sword on the hip. It's not a scabbard, just a ring connected to the belt. The ring is wide enough for the sword to go through, but it stops at the guard and hangs like that.
So, if you were to wear a strap that had a big ring at your back, you could potentially carry it like that. If the ring was a bit lower, say bellow your shoulderblades, you would be able to "sheath" and "unsheath" it with ease. The only problem I see with this is that the blade would dangle quite a bit.
Maybe instead of a ring, it was just a square. that way it would keep the blade fixed.
I'd really love for someone to test this.
That's the same way Kratos caries his sword in the latest God of War game. Shadiversity did some tests on it, but only with an axe, not with a sword
you again come to the scabbard not doing what a scabbard is supposed to do though, leaving the blade unprotected from the elements.
Ugh this is why I don't like swords anyway, they're like battlefield violins. Just carry a good spear or axe and you don't have to worry about "the elements".
Unless you're fighting a mage.
@@Swift_LN Honestly not really, unless you think the wooden haft is more effective than the metal blade.
Less susceptible? Sure; with less length there's less risk of substantial damage when it's corroded, but still it gets damaged and dulled by the elements.
A mace or hammer, on the other hand...
a poleaxe is way more versatile
You could quite easily make a full length scabbard where the leather is slit from halfway down, the leather could be made so it holds together nicely and protect the blade but would still allow it to be drawn from the back. Uses, leaving both hands free (hip carried sword would swing more freely and may require correcting) for pulling carts, riding horses, climbing ladders while still leaving the weapon accessible in case of emergency.
When you then rehang the scabbard on your belt you would pull up a leather ring that you attach to the belt, or use a bit of rope, this way the scabbard is held firmly closed and prevents the sword from slipping out of the scabbard and cutting its owner, essentially turning into a regular scabbard.
Biggest downside, drawing from the back repeatedly is likely going to harm the scabbard, but that is for emergencies so it would be an acceptable compromise. Also, the slit would allow water to enter the scabbard more easily in heavy rain, in both positions. But in heavy rain you could very well require your hands for balance to prevent falling when going from muddy streets to ladders. Soldiers in wars tend to wind up wading in the mud sooner or later (except in deserts, maybe)
In my mind back carried swords would make more sense for longer travel, with or without a backpack, to prevent the sword from requiring a hand for balance as well as to simply keep it's centre mass closer to your own centre mass. Making a scabbard that works wouldn't be difficult, the option is to either carry it on your hip and deal with the minor nuisances or wrap it and stow it in your backpack.
Don't underestimate minor nuisances, people often do more work just to avoid a minor nuisance.
I've been experimenting around with my husband's sword today, wich has a 90cm blade (not a Zweihänder, more like Bastard idk?) and I'm 175cm tall. While drawing OVER the shoulder does not work I found a way that's somewhat okay: I put the belt diagonally over my right shoulder like a strap bag. When I tuck at the front the sword sits on my upper back and can be carried okay-ish (the belt isn't balanced for this obviously). But to draw it I do this: move the belt back around until the handle and guard sit at the lower back to the left. Then the sword can be rotated slightly to a horizontal positon at the lower back (with the left hand on the scabbard) handle to the right, blade sticking out to the left. My right hand can then grip the handle from the right back, UNDER the shoulder, and draw it without too much trouble. I end up in the super secret reverse grip stance automatically ;) I can even put it back, because the left hand can comfortably hold the scabbard opening (well except one does not see anything).
From my HEMA experience (by which I mean carrying swords around on public transit and stuff), I think that wearing the sword on the back actually makes plenty of sense for one sort of character, interestingly enough it's one that always is depicted as doing it:
Link-style adventurers who climb about and use gadgets a lot. In general even a bigass feder worn on the back is very convenient for doing all sorts of motions.
The caveat is that I think that you wouldn't really be able to get away with a half scabbard or any other weird arrangement to draw it quickly. A character like that needs a proper one that effectively protects the sword.
So what I think makes the most sense for back-scabbard arrangements is one that's purely for transportation without even considering the possibility of quickly drawing it. The character would wear the sword on the back to be able to perform certain actions unhindered, but when there's a possibility of combat the setup should be quickly adapted to be worn on the waist.
If the character doesn't fight with some offhand weapon (or a two-handed sword), you could even just have the scabbard on a belt on the back, and if things might get dangerous, carry the scabbard in-hand for an especially quick draw, then ditch it and hope that you can retrieve it later.
Shadiversity did a couple of videos more recently about a back-scabbard that allows a quick one-handed draw and a one-handed re-sheathe while being reasonably protective and pretty secure - basic design is to have a side-slit for the top half (or so) of the scabbard, and a base-plate beside it to help guide the blade back in.
We should also acknowledge the possibility that the sword on the back was a burial style, and that the figurines are meant to represent the burial practice, or possibly the spirits of the dead.
Also, there's the woodblock art of a samurai carrying an odachi on the Wikipedia page (as the article you brought up mentioned) - this was probably done to transport the large blade when not in use, I don't get the impression that one would attempt to draw it form that state. I could be wrong ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I had one shoulder belt in LARP at some point that was basically using 2 star-shaped cylinders with rounded points that were mounted on rigid iron pins. When I pushed the handle between the 2 cylinders (vertically would look basically like this: * 0 * ) the distance between the 2 was a bit under the actual size of the handle so it would force the 2 iron pins apart and the tension it would generate kept the blade in place. The only caveat was that it was homemade and I had nothing to keep the belt from rolling or moving so it was kinda uncomfortable and the blade kept going down because of it. It was awfully quick to draw and put back though, much faster than a traditionally enclosed scabbard.
If you put that online and linked, I think people would take interest and perhaps even fix the problems you were having.
Hell, I don't even LARP and I'd be interested in seeing some pictures linkes out of sheer curiosity.
I think hip-mounted scabbards are by far the most practical, for reasons mentioned in the video. However, there are ways I can think of to bypass the disadvantages of a back-mounted scabbard. One could still have a scabbard that goes the entire length of the blade if there were an opening in the outward side of it that allowed the sword to be drawn like it had a shorter scabbard and still boast the protection of a full scabbard. I dislike the idea of magnets being used to mount a sword because it will not offer the protection of a scabbard and will also have one of two problems: 1, it will require a small effort to break the magnetic bond between the sword and the magnets, or 2, it won't carry the sword with enough strength. There is also the significantly smaller risk of the sword itself gaining slight magnetic charge, generating another factor in combat. I deeply enjoy your videos, Skal, and I look forward to each one you make.
Hey Skal! I know I'm a little late to the party here but I actually got an idea for a "on the back carry" scabbard from Valkyrie Profile 2 and it would work for a longsword or other similarly long weapons:
A short scabbard like the one you're using, but mounted lower on the back, and a snap loop that would go around the cross guard. Unsnap and pull up 6 inches and you can use your longsword or claymore.
One of the characters in Valkyrie Profile 2 had a greatsword that he kept in a scabbard similar to what I've described.
Anyway, great video, love your work.
I wonder how they'll work around this in the Witcher Netflix show, because doing this old trick of cutting away at the draw would be noticable quickly considering how often it'll happen in the show. I personally wouldn't mind if they would just ditch that entirely, but I guess some of the fanbase would want to murder the writers for that. Generally the way Geralt and Ciri draw their swords in the books makes no sense. They pull on the shoulder strap which holds the scabbard and then draw, as if this fixes the problem of your arms being to short. Though you could argue that it's never explicitly stated that their scabbards are fully closed.
Just a slit on one side of the scabard. As long as it's shot from the front nobody will notice.
True. I like to think that maybe they aren't always immediately drawable, which would be more realistic than the games. In one of the trailers for the Witcher III (I think it was called killing monsters), we see Geralt riding Roach with his swords strapped to Roach's side. It's not terribly practical for getting to them in a hurry, but it seems rather efficient as a way to carry them. Besides, it's not like witchers are helpless without their swords (though the video games kinda disagree there). In the trailer i mentioned, geralt kills 3 (I think) soldiers, who have weapons, with only a dagger.
Side note: witcher swords seem to have sheaths a lot of the time, which might make things easier since sheaths are flexible.
I wouldn't know since I haven't read books, but in the last game sheaths for iirc all witcher swords are flexible, so there's that.
In the first books Geralt does not carry the Silver sword on his back. It is packed with other supplies on Roach and only taken out and made ready when on a monster killing job.
As a Yorkshireman, I can say we are a bit special in the head.
Yup
At first I was offended. But then I thought about it and realised we are in fact all retarded (in the eyes of everyone else, that is)
@@ellisbarnett0292 why i wanna know whats different with ye guys? Genuinly curious
illyrian Raider we eat our bains after they’re born.
@@ellisbarnett0292 wut? Lol
Ancient Celtic swords might perhaps have been bronze? If so, the need to keep the blade metal out of the elements is reduced, making a half-scabbard somewhat more practical.
As a separate matter, who made that particular Viking-style sword? It's quite nice looking.
Last point about back scabbards; there were historical cases of swords being carried on the back for marching and transport, including big two-handed swords of several kinds in several cultures. But that's not the same as wearing them on the back into battle, where one expects to need to draw them. So I wonder if these Celtic depictions might not be a case of wearing the sword for travel and transport, and if the sword might not have been transferred to a more conventional waist belt when battle was expected.
And on a very different point, the French *did* adapt to English longbows, with heavier armor, more use of crossbows, and more dismounted attacks, and the adaptations were successful in some battles; look, for instance, at the battle of Castillion. And for that matter, the battle of Poitiers was won by the English without recourse to their longbows.
Depends on which "celts". They came to Ireland in 4 or 5 different invasions, around the late bronze age starting, and into the iron age ending
I doubt big swords were needed to be drawed at a moment notice. For example a Japanese Swordmen may of had his Tachi, wakizashi, and his Tantō on his waist which were more general practical weapons then his ōdachi.
Just so.
I'm just wondering if the Celtic figurines in question were showing that sort of "transport" of swords on the back, or if they really were wearing their swords on their backs as a routine matter, with the intent to draw them quickly if needed. It is, after all, possible to draw a short blade from the back, even with a full-length scabbard. On the other hand, even with Skallagrim's technique, it's still troublesome to re-sheath a sword into a scabbard worn on the back.
My own suspicion is that the no one used half-scabbards with iron swords, and that, if some ancient Celts did wear swords on their backs, the blades were either bronze, or else, if iron, then short enough to allow for a full length scabbard.
Do we know which era those figurines are from? That might tell us if the swords in question were likely to be bronze or iron.
+mk14m0
I assume the figurines with the swords on their back aren't accurate depictions of warriors. Though I imagine it'd be bronze if the swords were real.
I know that I'm commenting on a kinda old video, but I'm a pretty new subscriber so lets do this :) I am really far from an expert I just fell in love with arms and armor actually two years ago. And it is not about my knowledge, much more about my logic, that you mentioned, there are examples that some people used to carry the sword on the back. And for me it is about when you talked about drawing the sword. Because in my opinion the scabbard is about carrying and preserve the sword. Nothing else. Okay it can be used for fighting but that is not the main reason. To put it back on your waist is much more easier. Maybe that can be a reason. For me I'm about lets carry it on my back, draw it when the time comes, then when it is over, move the scabbard to my front or to an angle where I can put it back.
Thank you for your content!
I've always interpreted the "sword on the back" thing as a means of transporting your hella big longsword while traveling on foot. If you're attacked on the road by brigands or trolls, you pull your one-handed sword from your waist. Once you get to your destination, you have your big-ass sword for big-battle and head-lopping. Also, if you really need that weapon from your back, you have your nerdy little squire draw it while you crouch on one knee. Also a good time to finally let out that fart you've been holding since Shadowdale without the hot elven archer of the party hearing.
What if the scabbard was like yours but on the back it had a section that went all the way up the guard, wrapped around the edge but was still open on the other side?
Since you're wearing it on the back, the part where the blade is exposed would be more or less covered by the wearer but you would still be able to draw it from the back since the scabbard is open halfway.
It could've been accomplished with cured leather hide, since you can make it adopt a particular shape when it's been treated.
Exactly what I was thinking.
Rain, dust, humidity would easily go into the scabbard and would damage the blade. You do not spend that much money for a sophisticated blade weapon plus that many extra hours training to be able to use the benefits of a blade effectiveley just to allow to get the blade - the core value of your whole combat philosophy - to be damaged that easily. It is like that a Formula 1 racing team allow the tyres to get damage without reason just because the handling of the tyres which causes the damage looks sooo cool ;)
Rust prevention is literally just wiping the blade with oil or melted lard or something like that. I use literally just canola oil when I wipe to prevent rust on my rifles
13:13
This small editing error shows just how much work goes into making videos like this. Skall like most people, actually has to say each line several times to get it "just right". So, if he has to recite a 15 minute video 4 or 5 times, do the math...That's a long, long time, and a lot of work...
Yeah, no thanks. I also stick to the hip method.
12:55 By the way, it is true that the Japanese wore their Nodachi/Odachi on their back, but not always. If you carry it on most of your way BEFORE the battle, it's understandable because it's more convenient to carry. But into the battle, they always carried it in their hands, with an assistant who helps you unsheath it if it is very long. Some Nodachi were short enough to carry on the hips without much problem.
their scabbard ropes are flexible, you see them pulling it down with their left hands and pulling up the sword righthand
@@AdrianOkay They are usually made of wide silk stripes or sometimes leather. They can move it because it's not secured in the way European swords were.
For the backpack scabbard idea- If you were to secure a regular scabbard to the side of a pack in such a way that it could pivot when you draw, that would remove the clunky over the shoulder draw (or at least reduce it to manageable levels). The advantage this confers is mainly in weight distribution and keeping everything in one place. I'm not suggesting this is a really practical solution, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to hear it had been done.
For the Romans, I read that rank and file troops wore them on the right not because of the shields, but because it purposely made drawing a bit slower/harder than from the left because war was considered an organized activity that didn't need a quick draw. Discipline was enforced on the troops with this because they should only be drawing their swords when sharpening/maintaining their sword or when ordered to. Centurians on the other hand wore it on the left because they were "above discipline" and wore it on the left as a status symbol. Solid video, and keep up the good work!
Not true about the hundred years war though, they lost that way in Crecy and Azincourt, but their tactics evolved after crecy, and they largely stopped mounted charges at defensive positions as the war went on. It happened again at Azincourt because it appeared as flat terrain and the french army was so large compared to their opponents, and this wasn't a commander decision, but knight's indiscipline, while the commander had ordered a heavy infantry slow advance rather than a cavalry charge. The battle of Cocherel is a good example of the French army's adaptation, with their commander faking a retreat to lure the english out of their defensive position, before turning back and smashing their exposed army. Another example is in the battle of Pontvallin, the french advanced on forced march to attack before the English could fortify their position, destroying their force.
Oh, those French. Always retreating, even as a form of attack
Well the English showed them that moving forward didn't work, so they completely inverted their philosophy I guess XD
Classic Celts, fitting a blade where ever one could fit.
Seriously, just watch Conan the destroyer it has a perfect example of how to ware a sword on the back. It happens when they enter the ruins where the gem is held, specifically watch Conan in the background.
My favorite example.
Another option is to just have the sheathe open on the side on the upper portion. Like a slit. I've seen sheath/scabbards like this before (I think even on this channel). This seems to usually be done because of the shape of the sword. If the slit wasn't there, you wouldn't be able to get the sword in/out of the sheath--even on the hip. The swords in question are usually wider near the point and narrower near the hilt leaving one of two options for the sheathe; either make the whole sheathe the same width, or have it shaped the same as the sword but be open on the side halfway up ;). This would not only make it possible to unsheathe a sword on your back, but also fit with how it's done in video games. Rather than clipping through the sheathe, they'd be slipping the sword through that slit ;).
Shadow of Mordor also had a clever solution.
For a sword that tapers toward the tip, a special scabbard with a V or U shape cut into it would still protect the edge, and hold the blade firmly in place, but also allow the blade to stick out of the cut portion of the scabbard as it was drawn, preventing the thinner tip from getting caught in it
You showed the picture of Geralt of Rivia but he actually slightly pushes up on his scabbard holster when you draw the blade and putt it away nice detail and no clipping just a side note enjoyed the vid
Even Sapkowski describes it this way. Also, I really enjoy first game animations, when Geralt leans and strikes a pose.
If I had the proper video equipment i'd film this, but lets say for a proper longsword on the back, with a blade length of oh....lets say 42 1/2 inches to honor my man Geralt's sword size, Simply build a custom full length sheath, then cut an incision in it on the side OPOSITE of the side it would hang, so if the blade was the direction of this slash: /, when hanging on your back, you'd carve the notch in the LEFT side. so, once you did that, you'd coat it in whatever material and fancy it up but be sure to leave that gap down to about half of the blade's length down the sheath. then, you should be able to draw your sword from the back with no issue. TESTED AND CONFIRMED> try it yourselves!
I've actually been working on designing a similar sheath for boffer larp great swords but haven't had the time or materials to build my test build for it
Shadiversity did this design with a fewadjustments, if you haven't watched it already :)
And now? You have to coat the scabbard again and again once you used it? And if not? Dust, rain, humidity would crawl into the scabbard and would damage the blade.
The word Zeitgeist is used in the englisch language? Thats interesting.
It's weird how many actually are used in english. Angst and Zeitgeist are the most prominent but there are a few others
Kindergarten is also used in english.
And in HEMA, there are tons of german words used like Federschwert, Messer, Zweihänder, and various techniques have german names.
we stole most of the words in english well 50/60% at least and counting ,,especially more modern or global words ( as do most other languages things like sushi and plastic and zeitgeist certain words get incorporated into most languages,, mostly because it's easier than making up a new word ) and a lot of english and German words share the same root eg, night , nacht- this especially noticeable in scotland where
{The words in this list are pronounced exactly the same or almost exactly the
same in Danish as in Scots and have the same meaning :
-
SCOTS DANISH aff af
alane alene bairn barn bane ben
blae bleg blad blad brent braende claith klaide
clart klatte coo ko cruik krykke cruisie kruse dook dykke drucken drukken efter
efter forbye forbi fremmit fremmed gang gang gavel gavl greet graede grey
-
hairit graharet grue gru grund grund hals hals het hed
hoose hus ken kunne,
kende kilt kilte kirk kirke lang lang ligg ligge lirk lirke lowe lue mair mer moose
mus oot ud reek rog rowan ron saip saepe sark saerk sang sang seck saek seik
syg siccar sikker skaith skade skellum skaelm skelly skele smaa sma smidd
y
smedje smool smugle smit smitte soor syre starn, stern stjerne stane sten.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, extract from The Scots Language and Its European Roots by
Dr Sheila Douglas}
@@blacksnow150 y'all forgot the words to abseil, abseiling and rucksack
Boris The OED is the definitive record of the English language, featuring 600000 words, 3 million quotations, and over 1000 years of English.,,, im pretty sure i forgot more than those 3 :)
Really digging the sounds and effects you are adding to your videos.
Strap with a rail system fitted on it and a special scabbard for the rail.
That way you can easily slide the scabbard down while pulling with the other hand.
5:44 idk but to me it sounded like he farted while filming😂
Lol that's just the shield
Carrying a sword on your back.
"Im transporting my sword, im not preparing for battle, its just transport, be it to the blacksmith or to sell it or what ever"
Potentially...
"i carry my sword on my back so that i have it with me, but i don't want it to be in the way, so i put it on my back, if i need to draw it, its there... but it will be hard, but i still have it with me and its not really in the way, im more likely to draw my utility knife than my sword in an emergency... but if i see armed men in the distance, i still have time to deal with the issue of pulling out the sword, putting it away is not really needed to be done quickly."
Then again, people "back in the day" were induviduals just as today...
Im sure they had "this is über leet and cool" mentality just as people do today...
Then again... just as today... they had experts with experience (bouth good and bad)... that no one listened to because "i know better hur-dur!" (i have a small suspicion that i may be in this category but i do my best to learn from others, and still experiment my self)
/What is written above is nothing but assumptions, speculations and my taughts on things based on my experiences, im not even close to an expert... not even sure im a novice... but still its the internet and needs to be said.
13:30 in your previous video, the one where you said that people would never carry swords on their back, you pulled a sword from a scabbard on your back, and the scabbard was all the way up to the shoulder. And while it might be a lot more troublesome with long swords, for most of history, swords were short!
Ninja Hombrepalito and even after being wrong for calling something ridiculous in his previous video, he does it again in this video.
Bryan Merced ... I mean... on his defense, we all call things ridiculous sometimes. And many times we (collectively) are wrong.
One thing I thought of regarding full scabbards and sword on the back was if the harness you wore only anchored the scabbard near the shoulder. Like a hinge, so it wouldn't flop around to the sides, though you'd probably want a magnet connection at the bottom as well. That way, when you start to draw it, the scabbard tilts, letting you draw the sword over your shoulder, and then falls back, reconnecting to the magnet so it doesn't flop around.
The sag issue is easily solved with an over the shoulder strap that attaches to the belt. Extra benefits to that are that the soft tube you mentioned could run along the shoulder blade nicely without flopping down behind you and alloeing you to potentially sheath the sword easier as well since the opening would be semi ridgidly mounted to one spot on the shoulder.
One thing I’ve heard is the Scottish held the claymore on their backs
I think there's some pictoral evidence of that. Certainly makes sense as a transport method. I'll be another voice for real back carry being a transport method rather than something anyone thought of using to deliver blows right from the scabbard.
That would make sense because the claymore was a battle field weapon not a self defence weapon
See skall, with the sword on your back I instantly want to give you 1000 gold, with it on your side I just want to put you in a disappointing mmo based anime
*How about*
_Katana on the back?_
Dean Natuno
How about TWO katanas?
How about no
How about SABRE on the back?
nuke
personally, I'd say the blade is too long....
The shorter Wakizashi....may be
Easiest solution I can think of is for the scabbard to be open along one side, halfway down. To draw the sword, you would pull up to the length of your arm, and slide it sideways out of the open side. The scabbard would need to be made of harder material, so that the opening doesn't bend closed and make resheathing difficult. But a wooden or thin metal edge could keep it in shape easily enough. This also greatly improves the protection that the scabbard gives to the sword, since it can still go all the way up.
A possible solution to the full scabbard problem is having some sort of mechanism where when the sword is fully seathed, a cover would clasp around the blade when detecting the pressure of the blade in the sheath (it would be easy to do with modern technology, but harder to do purely mechanically), and conversely when the blade is pulled and no long er fully in the sheath the scabbard would loosen around it making it easy to draw. There are a lot of possibilities for how something like this could be implemented, but it would probably make for a very expensive scabbard.
A perhaps simpler solution would be to design the scabbard so that it can open up on one side when the sword is being drawn. These are fun problems.
Spring loaded sheath!!! 😂😂
:O
R2 D2 style pop out over the head sort of thing?
One enemy of metal gear rising revengeance had gunpowder powered draw, using the intertia for the first blow
You mean Jetstream Sam.
@@ronnielenroberts6136 I avoided saying his name because the edgyness would invalidate my comment
Drawing the shield from the back?....
Malva just turn around and take the hit lol
You're supposed to carry shields on your back, to protect yourself from rocks, lava and deku nuts.
Flinch Fu Wrong; you carry the shield on your back to protect yourself from rocks, lava, and flaming bats. You hold out your wooden Deku Shield to protect against the Deku Nuts.
Matthew St. Cyr Not entirely wrong, ICBM deku nuts come from above.
Flinch Fu MIRV deku nuts?
I see an ad!! Hope more people can see your videos.
Skall, I have a hangar/baldric which makes bastard swords/longswords viable for back carry. It involves a pair of L shaped hooks to hold the crossguard in place and a 1/3rd length sheath to protect the percussive part of the edge and down to the point. Its actually really easy to draw and re-sheath.
Big advantage with a back scabbard is if you're running or jogging. If you've ever had to run flat out with a sword on your waist, you know how it tends to flop around (possibly entangling your legs). You can mitigate this by holding the sword in place with one of your hands. Remember though that a sword is a sidearm. If you have a shield in one hand and a polearm or axe in another, there's nothing left to keep the sword steady while you move.
Another point is that I don't think the concept of a tactical draw for a sidearm was as universally accepted before modern times. It might simply be a case of the sword being slung where it is easiest to carry over long distances rather than were it's easiest to access. There's a reason we use backpacks and not waistpacks, after all. A back-scabbard user might simply plan on taking the time to shrugging off the entire baldric and scabbard before drawing if he ever needed to use the weapon. Perhaps he'd even shift the sword to his waist only when he was sure he was going to get in a fight and not before.
But.... but... but...... muh magic!
endomobo Or even better, lazy animations. In Dragon Age every character wears the weapon on the back and if you look closely, you can see it floating a bit behind the back :D
Also scabbards don't seem to exist in that Game
To be fair, magic swords in things like D&D often don't rust or dull by exposure to the elements, so magic can be a valid factor.
the arm argument is kinda overused if you look around there are plenty of videos of people using both hands to unsheath the sword. Even if a sword is on your waist you typically use one hand to keep the sheath in place and the other to draw which is how people draw katanas.
How do you like that silver??
What now you piece of filth?
Who would've thunk?
Medallions humming. Must be a place of power nearby.
I have seen (not on camera, with my eyes) a No-dachi (japanese twohanded sword) being drawn from the back by simultaneously pulling the scabbard down, so to speak. I am guessing that the fact that the scabbard is rigid adds to the usefulness of that drawing technique.
And a good example of irrational behavior and its historical presence. 😊
Hi Skall. Thank you for the video. If I'm not mistaking, the ninja wore small swords (ninjato) on their backs and pulled them by drawing the blade with the right hand and pulling the scabbard down with the left hand. The rope/belt that was used to hold the scabbard was not carried around the waist area but rather as a backpack (at least this is what we did in training sessions). Cheers!
What about armour and weapons
in the game Disciples 3 Reincarnation? what do you think about this gothic fantasy designs?
13:13 modern solutions X2
He had so many takes, that the modern solutions weren't modern anymore, so he had to do one more.
Kappa
shadiversity made a new back scabbard
Two proposals, first you have a large wooden sheath that is wide enough that the sword is able to articulate and come out with a normal arm motion. This would be functional in the flat style of cross guards that could basically fit flush against the* slot.
The other is basically Shad's idea/style with the cut out. As long as you have a proper shape for the hilt I will seal the top and the bottom is arguably the hardest place for water to get in. (obviously humidity exists, but then again if you had a sword you weren't usually poor and were trained and expected to care for all your gear, in other words oiling your sword wasn't some rocket science level of thinking outside your norm.) Also you would be able to wear a cloak to keep the rain out in most cases if it was terribly bad (or you just live in Brittain ;) ) and when you need to stop your blade the fighting is done anyway so you have time to deal with the layering issues.
Bonus Idea
I'm curious about the use of shield scabbards, you only really see them in fantasy like the fabled back scabbard but I also think it would be very viable especially with shields strapped to your arm. Most scabbards are a fairly tight fit so it won't just slide out even if riding on horse back (not going to go into the details but just know that there was already something especially for that anyway) and it would give you a very deadly striking surface if you're using a spear/polearm and someone gets inside your reach. Punch, fallback and swing with your main. Keeps you from throwing down your main weapon and possibly losing a reach advantage while remaining deadly to non-helmeted foes.
One way to carry on the back would be to lay it horizontally below the small of your back. Have leather loops on the scabbard to fit along the belt acting like a holster. Of course, this works best with shorter blades vs longer ones. But, that's the best way possible I'm aware of. As a whole... what I find is that in history most back scabbards are for two handed swords, and usually you unsheath by grabbing the scabbard with one hand and tilting it to give the hand used to draw the blade a bit of leverage and allow for a cleaner draw.
Otherwise... for all practical purposes the carry at the hip is the simplest solution to a wide variety of blades and gets the job done. There's a reason more people do it that way than any other method. Not because the other methods cant be done, but often there's no point comparatively speaking to the belt carry method. I often go out hunting and hiking and I tend to keep some sort of machete or similar type of blade on my person for such an event. One is a bit long, and so it carries great on the hip. The other is short but with a thick broad blade, and on the sheath it does have the loops to go on the belt. I tried to carry it by the hip where the hilt would stick out a bit beyond my leg. I found that didnt work well at all, but the small of the back was perfect, even when I had a pack on the back as well.
But that's more or less the ONLY blade I own that truly carries better that way. While I have others I can carry that way, they just arent as efficient on the draw or as comfortable that way. I dont really have two handed blades anymore, as I mostly had those when I was more into fantasy swords and such. But, the method I mentioned above I found to be effective with a couple of them that I had. But it's more conditional to having a two handed blade in my opinion.... Anything one handed carried over the shoulder is for style not function in my eyes.
when you're walking a long ass time, you''re going to throw out your back and hips having a sword swinging around off one side. Stow that thing, when you might need it you get it off your back - who wouldn't think to just loop their scabbard over something on their pack? Get over it, you're not going strait to combat in seconds - if you are, draw a dagger, anyway?
Arguing against the dramatic "time to fuck shit up" draw from the back? Sure, that probably didn't happen a bunch.
when shit hits the fan, you're probably going to try to shrug off your pack and anything else you can, anyway, being nimble enough to not die is pretty important.
There's also plenty of situations where you wouldn't mind people seeing that you're armed, but it would be terrible manners to have your sword at the ready.
Again it makes you look cool. Like your about to take a 10 year long boat trip for some reason and come back with worse animations
That reference.
I understood it.
What's the reference?
For the average soldier (who actually has a sword instead of a cheaper weapon like a spear), you'd want to wear it on the hip for an easy draw. Whether on the march or heading into battle, it needs to be at a ready position. Putting the sword away wouldn't matter. If you are putting it away, then whatever danger is passed and you can very well take your scabbard off if you have to, to sheathe your weapon.
But I could absolutely see a very good use for a sword on the back, and that would be for recon scouts on foot. You want to be able to run or at least move very quickly. You don't expect to engage the enemy per se, but you still want to have your weapon with you. A spear would be unwieldy in this case, even a bow might be. A sword on the hip might trip you up trying to run, crawl, and move around in dense foliage trying to get a close enough spot to see the enemy without being seen. A sword on the back however, would help you to maneuver quickly and easily, while still having a prime weapon you can get to fast enough to have ready if an enemy is approaching your position.
Why this might be an ahistorical scenario is that I don't remember reading anywhere that medieval armies had dedicated scouting forces, or specialized forces much at all. It seems they generally appointed random soldiers, usually light infantry for the task of attempting to scout out enemy forces. Other forms of scouting, such as keeping an eye on what is ahead or behind a marching army were left to light cavalry forces. Posted scouts were there to raise alarm and not really an active searching force and was a duty shared by all regular infantry.
Other than that, I suspect some people simply put their scabbards on their back when in friendly territory and it was for comfort, not any sort of tactical reason, just like slinging anything on your back is a naturally comfortable way to carry something.
Not sure if you saw Shadiversity's video yet, but he makes it work surprisingly well with a slot going down the side of the scabbard.
One thing that came to my mind about this; (main problem obviously being that your arm is shorter so you can't pull a sword from a full sized scabbard) is doing what the Japanese do, I noted that when they unsheat their katanas, they pull the scabbard in the opposite direction, so the blade is free of it sooner, likewise, when sheating the weapon, the pull the scabbard closer to it. So a possible solution could be making so that the straps holding the scabbard are somewhat elastic, so you can pull the bottom with one hand and pull the sword with the other; of course this will make the drawing of the sword a 2 handed matter, so using a shield with this setup could be difficult if is not a small one, plus you would have to get your chest exposed while drawing your sword.
The best option would be to only ever use a shortsword if you want to carry it on the back.
Skall don't forget about the Italian Rennaisance era Mass produced Arming swords. They had a clip mechanism integrated into the guard, where you would just unhook it for use
Maybe these warriors took the scabbard off before the fight? That is if you know you are going to fight. And maybe that was the case with any scabbard, it isn't very handy to have anything obstructing your movement while fighting. WWII and modern long range recon teams have a LOT to carry and they are not fighting with that weight on (well, atleast I don't think they do). Just a thought...
A far better set up if you're going to wear a sword on your back is one that is the length of your forearm positioned on the small of your back, hilt facing away from the side the hip sword is on. In this way you can grab it from the opposite hand and go in from a side stab in the areas where there are vulnerabilities in the enemy's armor. This would only be done in close corridor locations like storming a castle where archers are not going to be shooting at you. If you are in a location with archers then you need a shield. So if I were in a field battle, I probably wouldn't bother with the additional weight but in a castle seige, I would probably ideally want a shield that I can throw on my back at any given moment, a hip sword and a secondary short sword on the small of my back. Maybe I would have shields built for my army with handles on both sides, that way you could instantly pick one up on the battlefield if need be and defend with it, instead of fumbling with the edge of the shield to get a hold of it when it's facing down. The fact that it wasn't done probably means that it wasnt so much a big deal but nevertheless could help.
What you could do is have a slit in the scabbard large enough for your sword to fit through that way you can have your scabbard go to the guard and have less concern with elements, cutting yourself and it could be a third weapon that could be on your person. For example, a person could have their primary be a spear, secondary be their sword and then around the waist have a small one handed ax. It could be pulled off rather well with good design.
It's comfortable to wear sword on the back, when you go through the bushes or climb rocks or cross some water, in other cases that's not so, cause it takes long time to unshealth your blade - unless it's short like wakidzashi or you have some hi-tec special shealth.