![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 88
|
![]()
Yes, by the mid 19th Century swords were probably not as widely used; a pistol would be better. Nevertheless, the ledger art indicates they were used all the way to the end of the fighting on the Plains.
I did consult with two friends (one Choctaw and one Seminole) regarding gorgets. The original shell ones indicated clan/religious-political office. Of course, since in the SE religious/political status depended in part on clan affiliation, the gorgets frequently indicated both things simultaneously. The Choctaw tradition says the first metal gorgets were gifts from the Spanish, which would indicate an introduction by the mid 1600s at the latest. Apparently the Chickasaws had a series of bars engraved on the gorgets that indicated status. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 685
|
![]()
Hi Folks,
I suspect that the answer to the riddle of why was armour abandoned in the WW, resides in that once firearms gained ascendancy, it probably would have made more sense to carry extra ammunition and loaded pistols than tens of pounds of armour. From what I gather, cuirasses made some sense in military battles in affording some marginal protection against light shrapnel, spent bullets and ill directed sword cuts and lance thrusts, but this only in the European context. Once distances were vast, supplies stretched to the limit, self sufficiency and mobility of troopers becoming paramount, there were more important items to carry along than heavy armour. Just my thoughts.... Cheers Chris |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|