The Armour Archive

Take a look at the manner in which the scabbards are suspended in these images. The belt is worn on the outside of the scabbard. Exactly how is the belt connected to the scabbard?

Do you know of any modern reproductions that use this method?

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4974/15435/

http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4970/15404/
(far left and far right)

Can't comment on the belt attachement, but the upper scabbard looks the same as the Sword of Fernando de la Cerda (1253–1275), maybe a start point?

http://www.historiavivens1300.at/biblio ... anien2.jpg

I believe you are looking at two belts being worn. One to support the sword, and a decorative belt over it.

Yep. See how his surcoat is bloused over a mostly-invisible line at his natural waist?

The second small belt (cingulum) girdling the surcoat (ciglaton) is unrelated to the sword belt and plays no role in the suspension of the sword.

The effigy of Gilbert Marshal from 1241 seems to show laces coming through the sword belt from the sheath.
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/1170/4300/

http://www.themcs.org/armour/knights/Lo ... %20330.JPG I see no reason why the cross-strapped suspension shown in some miniatures wouldn't allow the belt to be placed either below or above the sheath.
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4380/14153/ http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4970/15402/

juan wrote:I believe you are looking at two belts being worn. One to support the sword, and a decorative belt over it.

Actually I had the opposite conclusion as to which belt was for which purpose (see photo in my OP).

The decorative belt at the natural waist seems unrelated to the sword scabbard.

The sword belt - worn low on the hips as usual - is worn over the scabbard.

Ernst - so this image is particulary revealing:
Cambridge MS R.16.2 fo023v-scabbard.jpg
You're saying that the belt is just run throught crossed straps on the scabbard?

That's how it looks with the scabbard on the far right in this image:
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4970/15404/

Harry Marinakis wrote:Ernst - so this image is particulary revealing:
Cambridge MS R.16.2 fo023v-scabbard.jpg
You're saying that the belt is just run throught crossed straps on the scabbard?

That's how it looks with the scabbard on the far right in this image:
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4970/15404/

Sure looks that way, doesn't it? (Although both images are from the same manuscript, so it could be the artistic rendering.)

These look to me to be the typical bit of artistic license mixed with reality than a strictly accurate rendering of actual scabbards. In his book The Archaaeology of Weapons, Oakeshott says that from 1100 through 1300 sccabbards remained fairly simple and changed little, and to my knowledge most suspension at this time was of a split leather strap wrapped around and/or woven through the leather cover of the scabbard, probably between risers. I would also say that from personal experience, (not historical knowledge) that your sword belt and the belt worn to cinch your mail at the waist would probably be separate belts.

The OP's picture is of two belts. The other pictures appear to be artistic license, or inaccuracy to detail.

I could buy the "artistic license" argument if so many other images did not show the identical "artistic license" error.

Disputing or discrediting the sources should always be the absolute last step in the investigation.

I prefer to think of it as being "skeptical."

Details are just bad as we are looking at super small illuminations blown up also the artwork is not as detailed as later works.

Combine it with the effigies posted and what I conclude is that in these cases a thong is either tied through the scabbard and then though the belt to keep them attached or that a leather thong Xs over the belt.

These belts are all fancy, there are other scabbards where the belt is integrated into the scabbard by small cuts in the leather of the scabbard and then passing the thongs on the end of the girdle (belt) through the cuts and tying them together. Like this http://fc03.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2010/ ... rliner.jpg

These are certainly not copies of historical scabbards, but good examples of the technique of interlacing the belt into the scabbard leather.

http://www.dbkcustomswords.com/scabbardgallery.html

Scott

Not being satisfied with the answers that I received here, I decided to do a bit more research on this matter. I found an article The Sword Belts of the Middle Ages by Albert Hartshorne in the Journal of Archeology, Volume XLVIII (47), from the year 1891. in this article, Hartshorne actually delves into the very matter of the sword belt/suspension shown in my original post.

Hartshorne examined the effigy of Gilbert Marshall, Earl of Pembroke, who died in AD 1241. Photos of this effigy are presented here.

The sword belt that is worn on the outside of the scabbard is actually attached to the scabbard by leather thongs, and is actually the primary sword belt.

See for yourself. You don't see this suspension very often.

I thought the Gilbert Marshal example was provided on 12/3.

The effigy of Gilbert Marshal from 1241 seems to show laces coming through the sword belt from the sheath.
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/1170/4300/

http://www.themcs.org/armour/knights/Lo ... %20330.JPG

Gilbert Marshal Belt.jpg

Yes, Ernst, and now we have Albert Hartshorne agreeing with us, that the belt worn outside of the scabbard is actually the primary sword belt

Harry,
Here are some alternate details from another English Apocalypse, this one's currently at the BNF. The figures are all following the same model in these three English manuscripts all from c.1250.
Morgan M.524
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4664/12445/
Bodley Auct. D.4.17 Apocalypse
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4380/8846/
BNF Français 403
http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b8447298r/f37.item

Thanks Ernst. So I've been doing a lot of research and I've found some interesting things... I'll post details in a day or two with specific dates and references.

It seems that these "vertical" scabbard suspensions were the norm up until the middle of the 13th Century. There seems to be an endless variation in these "vertical" suspensions. My current project is to catalog all of these variations.

It wasn't until about AD 1250 that the offset belt appeared, first in England.

So in order to be historically accurate, no sword suspension before c. AD 1250 should have an offset belt, they should all have vertical suspensions (such as those shown by Ernst). This includes all Oakeshott Type X, Xa, XI and XIa swords, as well as all of the early Type XII swords.

The effigy shown below is one of the first examples of an offset sword belt. Notice the date.

The effigy of David de Esseby, Church of St Mary Magdalene, Castle Ashby, Northamptonshire, England
AD 1265
http://effigiesandbrasses.com/1249/2965/

Here's one for you Ernst, look at this vertical suspension:
http://manuscriptminiatures.com/4688/12045/