Wearing a basket-hilt claymore with kilt...

**Tobus** · 17th May 12, 05:27 AM

More questions, if I may...

I see examples of the baldric being worn over the waist belt, as well as examples of it being worn under the waist belt. This portrait is a good example of them being worn differently:

By far, it seems the most common style is to wear the waist belt over the baldric, which I assume is more practical to help stabilise it and keep it from swinging. Is either way more 'correct', or is it just personal preference?

And on a similar note, I see examples of the baldric being worn both over and under a plaid. The example I just showed, as well as several other examples in this thread, show it over the plaid, and this seems to be the most common. But OC Richard's personal example shows him wearing the baldric under his piper's plaid, and I have seen a few other instances of this as well. So again, is one way more 'correct' than the other? Or do the rules vary, depending on whether you're in the military, or a piper, or something else, or is it just down to personal preference again?

**SlackerDrummer** · 17th May 12, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by Tobus

Is either way more 'correct', or is it just personal preference?

There is a more "correct" way in the Royal Regiment of Scotland. Baldric over belt.

**MacMillan of Rathdown** · 17th May 12, 08:22 AM

With civilian attire I suspect that it's a matter of what goes on first when dressing, with those who may have worn a sword in the military following army regulations. My take is that since one is likely to have to put on and take off the sword several times during the course of the day wearing the baldric over both the plaid and dirk belt makes the most sense.

**Tobus** · 17th May 12, 08:27 AM

SlackerDrummer, yeah, I figured the official military regulations would have something to say about it. I guess the question is whether civilians (or reenactors, really) should follow what the military does, or do their own thing. And MoR's explanation seems to make the most sense. Do whatever works best!

But I do find the photo of the Royal Regiment uniform very interesting. From the front, the red sash is under the baldric. But from the back, the baldric is over the sash. That must make it terribly confusing when getting dressed! You can't just put one thing on and then another.

**Woodsheal** · 17th May 12, 08:53 AM

My experience is only with wearing a broadsword with 18th C. dress (I wouldn't wear one with modern dress!). In those days, your waistbelt was holding up your kilt, and with a plaid the folds of tartan at the waist cover the belt - so, there's no way you can wear the baldric under the waistbelt. Conversely, I do wear my baldric under the plaid. That way, if the weather turns inclimate, or you get a chill, you can loosen the plaid, wrap yourself up for comfort, and protect your sword at the same time. The baldric worn over the plaid indicates the latter is only be worn for show, not actual use...!

**Ryan Ross** · 18th May 12, 07:46 PM

Originally Posted by Tobus

More questions, if I may...

I see examples of the baldric being worn over the waist belt, as well as examples of it being worn under the waist belt. This portrait is a good example of them being worn differently:

By far, it seems the most common style is to wear the waist belt over the baldric, which I assume is more practical to help stabilise it and keep it from swinging. Is either way more 'correct', or is it just personal preference?

And on a similar note, I see examples of the baldric being worn both over and under a plaid. The example I just showed, as well as several other examples in this thread, show it over the plaid, and this seems to be the most common. But OC Richard's personal example shows him wearing the baldric under his piper's plaid, and I have seen a few other instances of this as well. So again, is one way more 'correct' than the other? Or do the rules vary, depending on whether you're in the military, or a piper, or something else, or is it just down to personal preference again?

It might be worth noting that the fellow on our right is obviously not wearing a functional baldric, as he is carrying a claymore. Perhaps that may have something to do with it?

**Glenn Adrian** · 1st June 12, 05:09 AM

Darkwood armory shows an english basket hilt dated 1560ish, and alchem a reaver 1/2 basket hilt recovered from the mary rose dating to 1545. So the basket hilt was common throughout Britain during the 1500's. But they probably did not have plates, only bars. The reaver hilt shows straight quilions. The 1560 english basket shows the sword catching loops at the top of the basket in front of the blade, although it still has quillions, which have been bent back to loop towards the basket!

And rapiers where not unknown in the boarders and probably lowlands.

If you like these then I would pick up a combat legal blunt broadsword or backsword, and find a HEMA/WMA school which teaches highland broadsword. It is easy to learn and a wicked dueling system. It has benefited from having several hundred years of development of sword systems.

**Panache** · 26th June 12, 08:26 AM

Gents,

Something to keep in mind is that all these portraits and photographs do not necessarily what people actually wore in life! I have noticed in a huge number of old portraits/photographs men posing with weapons, that doesn't mean they really normally carried them.

Cheers

Jamie

**Scout** · 26th June 12, 08:41 AM

An excellent point! I'm reminded of photos from the American Civil War of soldiers with multiple pistols, knives, etc., tucked into their belts or brandished for the camera. Many people are not aware that these were usually the photographer's props!

**Tobus** · 26th June 12, 08:44 AM

I personally don't care whether they "normally" carried them or not. Even if they only carried them for high ceremonial purposes, I still want to make sure I understand HOW they carried them when they did.