Sword Question?

[Doc Hudson]

Hey Doc,

Oh, ok, because you say so, it MUST be true. And, of course, I believe everything else I read on the internet too.

Your betray your ignorance. "Sargeant" in 1066???? Did you mean "squire"? I think they cleaned and carried swords for their knights. Don't think they wore them ceremonially (or bore them in tournament or battle) until they were knighted. You Dixies and Yanks might think that the phrase "right to bare arms" originates with your Constitution, but it actually originates from the idea of becoming a knight (ie. a lesser noble) and obtaining the military and ceremonial privilege of baring a sword.

Give me some authority for the "non-nobles wearing swords" idea and the "sargeant was an office that existed in 1066" (other than "I say so, and therefore it is") and I might believe something you say. With proof, I could concede that a "sargeant" can wear a sword, but unless you are a sargeant, you are no closer to having a conventional "right" to wear a sword.

If you read all my posts that you originally responded to more closely, I was not the one possing to be the expert. I merely asked a question.

As to the dual, I believe it is customary for agreements regarding weapons, etc. to be negotiated between seconds. Further, I believe the appropriate course of conduct would be for your second to contact me to learn the identity of mine and that you and I have no further contact until the field of honour. Again, you prove your lack of historical knowledge.

J.K.D., esq.

You sound like a bloody barrister!

If you wish to become personally insulting, and I can do that quite well, let us take our arguement to Private Messages. I will be happy to exchange insults and demonstrate your ignorance in private rather than doing it in public where moderators will become incensed.

Perhaps things were done differently in Canada, but under the American and Irish Dueling Codes the challenged has the right to choose weapons. If the challenger demurrs, he has the option of apologizing.

Now, if anyone wants to continue the discussion without becoming insulting, carry on folks.

[Archangel]

You sound like a bloody barrister!

If you wish to become personally insulting, and I can do that quite well, let us take our arguement to Private Messages. I will be happy to exchange insults and demonstrate your ignorance in private rather than doing it in public where moderators will become incensed.

Perhaps things were done differently in Canada, but under the American and Irish Dueling Codes the challenged has the right to choose weapons. If the challenger demurrs, he has the option of apologizing.

Now, if anyone wants to continue the discussion without becoming insulting, carry on folks.

Do you have barristers in the US?

Duelling is also illegal in Canada.

Yes, it was getting insulting and over-reacting. If we are going to stop and challenge people on the basis of spelling we'll never finish the first sentence. JKDESQ, you didn't spell check either, does that discredit you? Answer: no.

I think sergeant is an old title, actually would have been serjeant for all that, can't put my hands on anything right now that would date it. As military, they would have a sword.
I don't think that's what the discussion is about. We're looking at when the ordinary man/woman on the street could carry swords/weapons. It may well be the American Constitution that legally removed it from nobility, noting that at that point there was no nobility to discuss anyway. (rest of discussion will be too politically charged for right now.) The remaining British colonies set their own rules but legally they would be under nobility structures, a subtle difference.
Another minor point that I can't back up right now, would be that different ranks of nobility would have different weapon privileges.

[Freelander Sporrano]

If I wanted to go whole hog with the Scottish regalia thing what kind of swordbelt would I use to hang a basket hilt claymore from?

Guy's just to remind you all what this thread is about....and I think it was answered a few pages back...OK!

[Archangel]

Guy's just to remind you all what this thread is about....and I think it was answered a few pages back...OK!

right you are. Sorry.
How about these babies: http://www.livinghistoryscotland.com/swordbelts.html

[arrogcow]

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.

Middle English sergeaunte, a common soldier, from Old French sergent, from Medieval Latin servins, servient-, servant, soldier, from Late Latin, public official, from Latin, present participle of servre, to serve, from servus, slave.

Earliest reference I have found of sergeant as soldier so far is Sir Thomas More's book “The Sergeant and the Frere;” in 1516

Shakespeare also used the word as military man quite often.

Chaucer uses the term Sergeant at law (a barrister) in the 1300's (a Sergeant was the "deputy" of the Sheriff so was probably armed. http://www.brazoria-county.com/SHERI...of_sheriff.htm


Adam

[bubba]

An NCO wasn't always called a Sergeant y'know. In the Roman Legions it was Centurion. There has always been that layer between the troops and the officers and in some Armies officers NEVER spoke to the ranks directly, but told the NCOs what they needed to and the NCO told the ranks.

[Mike1]

There have been a couple of posts removed from this thread.

If any of you choose to use the Private Messaging system of the forum, then keep those messages private. Quoting what another forum member has said in a private message is not acceptable.