Re: Bagpipe Commonality

[blackbow@juno.com (David H Ritterskamp)]

Poster: blackbow@juno.com (David H Ritterskamp)


>My point is, if one could establish that _knives_ were commonly
>carried by civilians in the Period, would that exempt them from
>any prohibitions on weapons of war in the royal presence?
>
>-- Alfredo
A:

I doubt it.  IMO, the knives the commoners typically carried were about
as ubiquitous as wallets and purses are today; they were simply a fact of
existence.

The knives the three bad brothers had, on the other hand, were actually
probably not called knives, but daggers at the least.


Think of the little knives as utility knives, box cutters, what have
you...you skinned your kill with it, cut your meat with it, and, if
necessary, defended yourself with it.  But not against somebody with a
dagger...

Which leads to the warping of the Crocodile Dundee quote that everybody
likes...

"That?  That's not a knife...well, actually that IS a knife.  THIS, on
the other hand, is a DAGGER."
Semantics, but fun semantics...

Lord Jonathan Blackbow
=======================================================================
List Archives, FAQ, FTP:  http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
            Submissions:  atlantia@atlantia.sca.org
        Admin. requests:  majordomo@atlantia.sca.org