| Author |
Message |
|
Robert Morgan
Location: Sunny SoCal Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Posts: 90
|
 Posted: Thu 15 Jun, 2017 3:25 pm Post subject: Carrying multiple weapons at the same time? |
 |
|
Hi all,
Just curious if you could point me to any period illustrations showing men at arms and knights in the medieval period carrying more than one weapon? For example, two swords, a falchion and an arming sword, etc. I'm not saying dual wielding, just referencing a very well-equipped knight, for example, who might be packing a little extra. Or, where a knight in a prebattle situation might be choosing between multiple swords. I know I've seen some but can't find them in my image library.
Many thanks,
Bob
|
|
  |
 |
|
Karl Knisley
|
| Posted: Thu 15 Jun, 2017 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well...there`s this guy.
 Attachment: 94.35 KB
|
|
|
|
|
|
Graham Shearlaw
|
| Posted: Thu 15 Jun, 2017 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No that doesn't happen just like you don't see people with 2 rifles today.
All swords are much of the same, there no reason to carry 2.
Now you might carry a small short sword and a big two handed sword.
But the short sword is a back up weapon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ben Joy
|
| Posted: Thu 15 Jun, 2017 11:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Are you specifically looking for two+ swords, or just multiple weapons in general?
German man-at-arms 1498 by Albrecht Dürer was a quick Google Find clearly showing a Lance and Sword (link is Wikipedia, but it's a better quality copy of the image from a dozen versions I saw):
Wikipedia link clearly showing a spear and sword. 16th century Icelandic man-at-arms. Picture is to depict Eiríkr Rauđi, who is equipped somewhat anachronistically, from the 17th century book Groenlandia by Arngrímur Jónsson:
thearma.org essay on leg wounds HERE states this is from a German 15th century manuscript and shows a knight with axe and sword:
These are all just quick google image search. I'm sure you could find more with a bit more digging. I'm sure there's also plenty of other people on these forums who could give you more information. However, again, specificity over whether you're looking for specifically multiple swords, or any combinations of multiple weapons would help in the providing images and whether what you're looking for exists.
"Men take only their needs into consideration, never their abilities." -Napoleon Bonaparte
|
|
|
|
|
Craig Peters
|
|
|
|
|
Benjamin H. Abbott
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Jun, 2017 6:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
It was common for cavalry soldiers to carry lots of weapons. For example, some 16th-century Spanish men-at-arms carried lance, estoc, arming sword, hammer, and dagger. Lance, sword, and mace was the iconic French standard for men-at-arms. Turkish and other steppe-style cavalry might carry bow, lance, saber, mace, and dagger, sometimes with an arquebus as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gary John
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Jun, 2017 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
There is an old Persian (I believe) instruction manuscript that instructs Calvary men to use first their lance in battle, then their mace, and lastly their sword.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Henry O.
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Jun, 2017 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's the portion of the Bayeux Tapestry which shows the saxon on the far left carrying a spear, sword, shield, and daneaxe.
The 13th century Scandinavian "King's Mirror" recommended that a knight have two swords, one worn on his belt and one attached to the saddle. I seem to recall there was a myArmoury thread with a couple of depictions that showed this but I can't seem to find it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Manning
|
| Posted: Sun 18 Jun, 2017 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Benjamin H. Abbott wrote: | | It was common for cavalry soldiers to carry lots of weapons. For example, some 16th-century Spanish men-at-arms carried lance, estoc, arming sword, hammer, and dagger. Lance, sword, and mace was the iconic French standard for men-at-arms. Turkish and other steppe-style cavalry might carry bow, lance, saber, mace, and dagger, sometimes with an arquebus as well. |
That goes back to the Late Bronze Age when you can see chariots festooned with all kinds of spare weapons from hatchets and quivers of darts to spears. In the renaissance rich men often had a train of servants to carry a rotella, some staff weapons and firearms, etc. (Or think of "gun bearers" in the Raj and 19th century expeditions to Africa). There are also a few cases where festooning yourself with impractical numbers of weapons becomes 'cool' ... Ruel Macareng talked about that.
But if they have to carry/handle them themselves, the vast majority of men pretty quickly pare down the list to no more than two sidearms, a shield, and a long staff weapon (or bundle of small ones), and carrying two slightly-different swords is more bothersome and less practical than carrying a long sword and a short dagger.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Moore
|
| Posted: Sun 18 Jun, 2017 3:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
I, myself, wouldn't feel comfortable--for lack of a better term--without going into battle with not at least a shield, spear, dagger, sword, and maybe an axe....not to mention armor. The spear would be the first line of attack, followed by shield and axe, with the sword as a last-ditch effort. The dagger would be the 'coup-de-gras' for any fallen foe. Old-school, baby.  Way old.....McM
''Life is like a box of chocolates...'' --- F. Gump
|
|
|
|
|
Eric S
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Jun, 2017 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gary John wrote: | | There is an old Persian (I believe) instruction manuscript that instructs Calvary men to use first their lance in battle, then their mace, and lastly their sword. |
Not uncommon in Indo-Persia for a warrior to carry multiple weapons.
|
|
 |
|
|
Graham Shearlaw
|
| Posted: Thu 22 Jun, 2017 11:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Firearms are a different matter as the reload times for muzzle loaders make carrying a spare pistol a wise idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic